On 05/12/2021 10:26, Timo Röhling wrote:
Hi Yadd,
thank you very much for your work on uscan. That new version 5
format looks really promising.
* Yadd [2021-12-01 09:11]:
* Version 5:
* Main (first) paragraph contains "Version: 5" and optional options
that change default values for
Hi Yadd,
thank you very much for your work on uscan. That new version 5
format looks really promising.
* Yadd [2021-12-01 09:11]:
* Version 5:
* Main (first) paragraph contains "Version: 5" and optional options
that change default values for source-paragraph
* URL and regex are
On 01/12/2021 22:16, Yadd wrote:
On 01/12/2021 21:07, Patrice wrote:
Really great!
And could the new uscan read a watch file from version 3/4/5 and output a
version 5 of it by its own (in-place or stdout)?
uscan --standardize
:-)
Yes but without optimization neither scheme (except some few
On Thu, 2021-12-02 at 10:16 +0100, Yadd wrote:
> Yes but the redirector often responded with 500 codes
500 codes probably just mean bugs in the redirector, which should be
easy to fix for anyone with access to the redirector source code.
--
bye,
pabs
https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Jonas Smedegaard writes:
> Quoting Gard Spreemann (2021-12-02 13:09:17)
>>
>> Jonas Smedegaard writes:
>>
>> > Quoting Gard Spreemann (2021-12-02 12:31:30)
>> >>
>> >> Paul Wise writes:
>> >>
>> >> > I also wonder if it is time to split debian/watch out of Debian
>> >> > source packages,
Hi
Le jeu. 2 déc. 2021 à 11:36, Yadd a écrit :
>
> Another idea to have a compromise:
> * uscan is released with versioned schemes (GitHub.json, sf.json,...)
> * when launched, it tries to download new version from a new Debian API
> (static json files)
> * if no response or no new
Quoting Gard Spreemann (2021-12-02 13:09:17)
>
> Jonas Smedegaard writes:
>
> > Quoting Gard Spreemann (2021-12-02 12:31:30)
> >>
> >> Paul Wise writes:
> >>
> >> > I also wonder if it is time to split debian/watch out of Debian
> >> > source packages, since upstream download locations
Jonas Smedegaard writes:
> Quoting Gard Spreemann (2021-12-02 12:31:30)
>>
>> Paul Wise writes:
>>
>> > I also wonder if it is time to split debian/watch out of Debian
>> > source packages, since upstream download locations generally change
>> > independently of the Debian package and so
Quoting Gard Spreemann (2021-12-02 12:31:30)
>
> Paul Wise writes:
>
> > I also wonder if it is time to split debian/watch out of Debian
> > source packages, since upstream download locations generally change
> > independently of the Debian package and so information about
> > upstream
Paul Wise writes:
> I also wonder if it is time to split debian/watch out of Debian source
> packages, since upstream download locations generally change
> independently of the Debian package and so information about upstream
> download locations probably should be maintained independently.
I
On Thu, Dec 02, 2021 at 11:36:08AM +0100, Yadd wrote:
> On 02/12/2021 10:16, Yadd wrote:
> > On 02/12/2021 00:34, Paul Wise wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2021-12-01 at 12:53 +0100, Yadd wrote:
> > >
> > > > Personally I dislike redirectors.
> > >
> > > A redirector service is superior to including the
On 02/12/2021 10:16, Yadd wrote:
On 02/12/2021 00:34, Paul Wise wrote:
On Wed, 2021-12-01 at 12:53 +0100, Yadd wrote:
Personally I dislike redirectors.
A redirector service is superior to including the redirector code
within uscan itself or within a debian/watch file, since when the
Le 2 décembre 2021 00:34:27 GMT+01:00, Paul Wise a écrit :
>On Wed, 2021-12-01 at 12:53 +0100, Yadd wrote:
>
>> Personally I dislike redirectors.
>
>A redirector service is superior to including the redirector code
>within uscan itself or within a debian/watch file, since when the
>upstream
On Wed, 2021-12-01 at 09:11 +0100, Yadd wrote:
> after few discussions with some devscripts maintainers, we decided to
> build a new "version=5" format for debian/watch.
It might be a idea to look at how other distributions do checking for
new upstream releases and adopt some of their
On Wed, 2021-12-01 at 12:53 +0100, Yadd wrote:
> sf.net because it needs JS interpretation
The sf.net redirector uses the RSS feed of the files.
This is documented at the top of the redirector HTML:
$ curl -s https://qa.debian.org/watch/sf.php/NSIS/ | grep -i rss
On Wed, 2021-12-01 at 12:53 +0100, Yadd wrote:
> Personally I dislike redirectors.
A redirector service is superior to including the redirector code
within uscan itself or within a debian/watch file, since when the
upstream website breaks the existing code, a service can be updated in
one place
On 01/12/2021 21:07, Patrice wrote:
Really great!
And could the new uscan read a watch file from version 3/4/5 and output a
version 5 of it by its own (in-place or stdout)?
uscan --standardize
:-)
Yes but without optimization neither scheme (except some few fields).
Example:
version=4
Really great!
And could the new uscan read a watch file from version 3/4/5 and output a
version 5 of it by its own (in-place or stdout)?
uscan --standardize
:-)
Wishes,
Patrice
On 01.12.21 12:50, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
Likewise, I would love if uscan could just learn how github, gitlab,
launchpad, etc are made so prople won't have to bother with sticking
urls into watchfiles, such as:
Source: GitHub
Source-Options:
namespace: trendmicro
project: tlsh
On 01/12/2021 18:39, Thomas Goirand wrote:
Hi Yadd,
Thanks a lot for working on this. What you are proposing (ie: using a
mime thing, which is easy to parse instead of the dirty command-line
oriented thingy of version 3 and 4) feels much nicer than what we
currently have.
On 12/1/21 12:53 PM,
Hi Yadd,
Thanks a lot for working on this. What you are proposing (ie: using a
mime thing, which is easy to parse instead of the dirty command-line
oriented thingy of version 3 and 4) feels much nicer than what we
currently have.
On 12/1/21 12:53 PM, Yadd wrote:
> Fix: will be
>
> Version: 5
Yadd writes:
> after few discussions with some devscripts maintainers, we decided to
> build a new "version=5" format for debian/watch.
> Principles:
> * keep compatibility with versions 3 and 4, no need to change all
>debian/watch files
> * new version 5 format using the same syntax than
On 01/12/2021 13:14, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Quoting Yadd (2021-12-01 13:04:09)
On 01/12/2021 12:50, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
Possibly, I'm indeed kind of unimpressed that we grew a parse for
nodejs' package.json and perl's META.json. Though I accepted it
because I saw some value, I'm totally in
Quoting Yadd (2021-12-01 13:04:09)
> On 01/12/2021 12:50, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> > Possibly, I'm indeed kind of unimpressed that we grew a parse for
> > nodejs' package.json and perl's META.json. Though I accepted it
> > because I saw some value, I'm totally in awe of universes where that
> >
On 01/12/2021 12:50, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 12:39:41PM +0100, Geert Stappers wrote:
Summary: unhide redirectors
And not only.
On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 09:11:17AM +0100, Yadd wrote:
after few discussions with some devscripts maintainers, we decided to build
a new
On 01/12/2021 12:39, Geert Stappers wrote:
Summary: unhide redirectors
On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 09:11:17AM +0100, Yadd wrote:
Hi,
after few discussions with some devscripts maintainers, we decided to build
a new "version=5" format for debian/watch.
Principles:
* keep compatibility with
On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 12:39:41PM +0100, Geert Stappers wrote:
> Summary: unhide redirectors
And not only.
> On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 09:11:17AM +0100, Yadd wrote:
> > after few discussions with some devscripts maintainers, we decided to build
> > a new "version=5" format for debian/watch.
To
Summary: unhide redirectors
On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 09:11:17AM +0100, Yadd wrote:
> Hi,
>
> after few discussions with some devscripts maintainers, we decided to build
> a new "version=5" format for debian/watch.
>
> Principles:
> * keep compatibility with versions 3 and 4, no need to change
28 matches
Mail list logo
