Re: Bug#859776: rejection

[Wookey]

On 2017-04-11 09:33 +0200, Paride Legovini wrote:
> [Note for whoever lands here: the package has been rejected from NEW
> because of unattributed files in lua/lexers].
> 
> Hello Adam,
> 
> I didn't realize that some files in lua/lexers were not fully attributed
> in debian/copyright. Regarding those files: there is one main author
> (that is attributed), then many single-file contributions from about 40
> different authors.
> 
> Should I list all these authors in debian/copyright, or can I do like
> it's done for the Linux kernel:
> 
> Files: *
> Copyright: 1991-2012 Linus Torvalds and many others
> License: GPL-2
> 
> hence writing:
> 
> Files: lua/lexers/*
> Copyright: 2007-2016 Mitchell  and many others
> License: MIT
> 
> What do you suggest?

The thing that really matters is the licence. If the whole thing is
definitely under the same licence then you can just list it as one
stanza with lots of authors. But if there are different licences for
the contributed parts then you really need to add stanzas for those.

Ideally you put in stanzas for all the logically separate pieces (say
several lexers from different conributors, even if they have the same
licence). But this level of detail is not required.

Even if you put it as one stanza because it's all one licence, it's
good practice to include all the authors names (that have indicated
their copyright by putting their names on something).

Wookey
-- 
Principal hats:  Linaro, Debian, Wookware, ARM
http://wookware.org/


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#860123: RFS: gsignond/1.0.6 [ITP] -- gSSO daemon and default plugins

[Corentin Noël]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist

 Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "gsignond":

 * Package name: gsignond
   Version : 1.0.6
   Upstream Author : Alexander Kanavin 
 * URL : https://gitlab.com/accounts-sso/gsignond
 * License : LGPL 2.1+
   Section : net

  It builds those binary packages:

gir1.2-gsignond-1.0 - gir bindings for gsignond
gsignond - gSSO daemon and default plugins
gsignond-doc - documentation for gsignond
libgsignond-common-dev - development files for gsignond
libgsignond-common0 - gSSO common library

  To access further information about this package, please visit the
following URL:

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/gsignond


  Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

  dget -x
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gsignond/gsignond_1.0.6.dsc

  More information about gsignond can be obtained from
https://gitlab.com/accounts-sso/gsignond.

  Regards,
  Corentin Noël

Bug#859776: rejection

[Paride Legovini]

On 2017-04-11 15:28, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 09:33:59AM +0200, Paride Legovini wrote:
>> [Note for whoever lands here: the package has been rejected from NEW
>> because of unattributed files in lua/lexers].
>>
>> Hello Adam,
>>
>> I didn't realize that some files in lua/lexers were not fully attributed
>> in debian/copyright. Regarding those files: there is one main author
>> (that is attributed), then many single-file contributions from about 40
>> different authors.
> 
> Very few projects bother tracking attributions of specific files.
> 
>> Should I list all these authors in debian/copyright, or can I do like
>> it's done for the Linux kernel:
>>
>> Files: *
>> Copyright: 1991-2012 Linus Torvalds and many others
>> License: GPL-2
>>
>> hence writing:
>>
>> Files: lua/lexers/*
>> Copyright: 2007-2016 Mitchell  and many others
>> License: MIT
> 
> I like this approach, it saves us a lot of work.  It'd be nice to hear from
> a ftpmaster, though, to reduce the number of trips to NEW.

I asked on IRC, didn't get a definitive answer, but my feeling is that
there is a preference for giving attribution when possible. I wrote a
simple shell script that generates the copyright entries for the lexers,
the output is like this

https://clbin.com/m32Id

Some entries could be joined, but doing it automatically becomes
nontrivial, as there are some files with more than one author. I lean
towards leaving it like this. If you think it's OK I'll upload a revised
package to mentors.

Paride

Bug#859776: rejection

[Adam Borowski]

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 09:33:59AM +0200, Paride Legovini wrote:
> [Note for whoever lands here: the package has been rejected from NEW
> because of unattributed files in lua/lexers].
> 
> Hello Adam,
> 
> I didn't realize that some files in lua/lexers were not fully attributed
> in debian/copyright. Regarding those files: there is one main author
> (that is attributed), then many single-file contributions from about 40
> different authors.

Very few projects bother tracking attributions of specific files.

> Should I list all these authors in debian/copyright, or can I do like
> it's done for the Linux kernel:
> 
> Files: *
> Copyright: 1991-2012 Linus Torvalds and many others
> License: GPL-2
> 
> hence writing:
> 
> Files: lua/lexers/*
> Copyright: 2007-2016 Mitchell  and many others
> License: MIT

I like this approach, it saves us a lot of work.  It'd be nice to hear from
a ftpmaster, though, to reduce the number of trips to NEW.

-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Meow!
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ Collisions shmolisions, let's see them find a collision or second
⠈⠳⣄ preimage for double rot13!

Bug#857131: marked as done (RFS: fgrun/2016.4.0-0.1 [RC, NMU])

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Tue, 11 Apr 2017 11:18:47 +
with message-id 
and subject line Bug#857131: fixed in fgrun 2016.4.0-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #857131,
regarding RFS: fgrun/2016.4.0-0.1 [RC, NMU]
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
857131: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=857131
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: important
X-Debbugs-CC: pkg-fgfs-c...@lists.alioth.debian.org

Dear mentors and pkg-fgfs-crew maintainers,

I am looking for a sponsor for the package "fgrun" into Unstable, perhaps into 
DELAYED/7 or DELAYED/10.

 * Package name: fgrun
   Version : 2016.4.0-0.1
   Upstream Author : Frederic Bouvier 
 * URL : https://sourceforge.net/p/flightgear/fgrun/
 * License : GPL-2+
   Section : games

It builds those binary packages:

fgrun - graphical frontend for running FlightGear

To access further information about this package, please visit the following 
URL:

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/fgrun

Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/f/fgrun/
fgrun_2016.4.0-0.1.dsc

Alternatively, one can view and download detailed package information on deb-
o-matic-amd64:

dget -x http://debomatic-amd64.debian.net/distribution#unstable/fgrun/
2016.4.0-0.1/

Changes since the last upload:

 fgrun (2016.4.0-0.1) unstable; urgency=medium
 .
   * Non-maintainer upload.
   * New upstream release. (Closes: #839357)
 - Drop patches applied upstream.
 - Refresh patches.
   * Switch upstream to SourceForge.
 - Update corresponding debian/watch file. (Closes: #851845)
   * Bump debhelper compat version to v10.
   * Apply "wrap-and-sort -abst".
   * Update Homepage information on SourceForge.

Detailed explanations:

* This package has a longstanding unfixed RC bug (FTBFS) and fell out of 
Stretch release. With absolutely zero reverse dependency and migration 
blocking, I believe fgrun should be able to enter unstable even though we are 
in freeze now (because it wouldn't affect other packages or Stretch release at 
all).

* A stripped src debdiff is attached here to ease your review. The stripped 
part are translation PO file's updates.

* For new d/watch file: I had a hard time making decisions and finally chose 
the 
sf.net redirector provided by qa.d.o, which points to flightgear *main* project 
tarballs. Fgrun is now a subproject of flightgear and I really couldn't find a 
better page to parse releases or even git tags. [1] Any suggestion would be 
welcome.

[1] This should be the correct page but way too hard to write d/watch file: 
https://sourceforge.net/p/flightgear/fgrun/ref/next/tags/

--
Sincerely,
Boyuan Yangdiff -Nru fgrun-3.4.0.final/CMakeLists.txt fgrun-2016.4.0/CMakeLists.txt
--- fgrun-3.4.0.final/CMakeLists.txt	2015-01-19 23:59:25.0 +0800
+++ fgrun-2016.4.0/CMakeLists.txt	2017-03-08 00:57:18.0 +0800
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@
 set(CMAKE_MINSIZEREL_POSTFIX "" CACHE STRING "add a postfix, usually empty on windows")
 
 file(READ version versionFile)
-string(STRIP ${versionFile} FGRUN_VERSION) 
+string(STRIP ${versionFile} FGRUN_VERSION)
 
 #packaging
 SET(CPACK_RESOURCE_FILE_LICENSE "${PROJECT_SOURCE_DIR}/COPYING")
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@
 
 # split version string into components, note CMAKE_MATCH_0 is the entire regexp match
 string(REGEX MATCH "([0-9]+)\\.([0-9]+)" CPACK_PACKAGE_VERSION ${FGRUN_VERSION} )
-set(CPACK_PACKAGE_VERSION_MAJOR ${CMAKE_MATCH_1}) 
+set(CPACK_PACKAGE_VERSION_MAJOR ${CMAKE_MATCH_1})
 set(CPACK_PACKAGE_VERSION_MINOR ${CMAKE_MATCH_2})
 
 message(STATUS "version is ${CPACK_PACKAGE_VERSION_MAJOR} dot ${CPACK_PACKAGE_VERSION_MINOR}")
@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@
 else (EXISTS ${TEST_3RDPARTY_DIR})
 set(MSVC_3RDPARTY_ROOT NOT_FOUND CACHE PATH "Location where the third-party dependencies are extracted")
 endif (EXISTS ${TEST_3RDPARTY_DIR})
-list(APPEND PLATFORM_LIBS "winmm.lib")
+list(APPEND PLATFORM_LIBS "winmm.lib" "Shlwapi.lib")
 else (MSVC)
 set(MSVC_3RDPARTY_ROOT NOT_FOUND CACHE PATH "Location where the third-party dependencies are extracted")
 endif (MSVC)
@@ -75,13 +75,16 @@
 
   message(STATUS "3rdparty files located in ${MSVC_3RDPARTY_ROOT}")
   set( OSG_MSVC "msvc" )
-  if (${MSVC_VERSION} EQUAL 1700)
+  if (${MSVC_VERSION} EQUAL 1900)
+  set( OSG_MSVC ${OSG_MSVC}140 )
+  elseif (${MSVC_VERSION} EQUAL 1800)
+  set( OSG_MSVC 

Bug#840750: RFS: picocoin/0.1-2.gbp43047g

[Joel DeJesus]

I uploaded a few different versions of what I had to try to clean up the
errors.

I think I am pretty close to the final version (latest at 0.1-4)

I could not figure out how to fix the warning about "ldconfig", but I
did add a trigger file for that to take care of it.

- Joel


PS added link for easy reference:
https://mentors.debian.net/package/picocoin

On 04/10/2017 11:53 AM, David Steele wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 9:13 PM, Joel DeJesus
>  wrote:
>> I have uploaded a new source package to fix some of the smaller issues
>> with the control files, copyrights, etc.  However, I seem to be stuck at
>> what to do with the library name, libccoin.
>>
>> I was planning on just have libccoin as the package name and just
>> managing the soname with the proper Makefile.am files.  However,
>> according to the "package-name-doesnt-match-sonames", I will need to
>> rename the package to libccoin0.
>>
>> Is it better for me to just change the name to libccoin0?
> Take a look at what the policy says.
>
> https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-sharedlibs.html
>
>> As for the dependencies, I will have to learn how to use pbuilder under
>> git-buildpackage and try to submit another source package.
> git-buildpackage is useful, but complicated first time out, and not
> necessary for this.
>
> https://pbuilder.alioth.debian.org/
>
> If you are using gbp, put the config file in the debian folder.See
> "builder=git-pbuilder".



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#857131: RFS: fgrun/2016.4.0-1 [RC]

[Boyuan Yang]

在 2017年4月10日星期一 +08 下午10:59:27，Markus Wanner 写道：
> @Boyuan: could you please:
> 
>  a) change the watch file to point to the github mirror and
> release tags you found? (Or provide some other way of automatically
> fetching an orig.tar.gz?)

Done. I'm using GitHub.

> 
>  b) commit your changes to alioth / collab-maint (do you have access,
> there?)

https://anonscm.debian.org/git/collab-maint/fgrun.git

Done. (master, upstream/2016.04 tag, pristine-tar)

> 
>  c) add yourself as an uploader, I'm happy to review and sponsor
> uploads of fgrun for you.

Done.

Source pkg:
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/f/fgrun/fgrun_2016.4.0-1.dsc

Build status:
http://debomatic-amd64.debian.net/distribution#unstable/fgrun/2016.4.0-1/
buildlog

Changes:

 fgrun (2016.4.0-1) unstable; urgency=medium
 .
   * Team upload.
 + Acked by original maintainer.
   * New upstream release. (Closes: #839357)
 - Drop patches applied upstream.
 - Refresh patches.
   * Add myself onto uploaders list.
   * Switch upstream to GitHub mirror.
 - Update corresponding debian/watch file using GitHub. (Closes: #851845)
   * Bump debhelper compat version to v10.
   * Apply "wrap-and-sort -abst".
   * Update Homepage information on SourceForge.

Looking forward to your review and sponsorship.

--
Sincerely,
Boyuan Yang


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#859776: rejection

[Paride Legovini]

[Note for whoever lands here: the package has been rejected from NEW
because of unattributed files in lua/lexers].

Hello Adam,

I didn't realize that some files in lua/lexers were not fully attributed
in debian/copyright. Regarding those files: there is one main author
(that is attributed), then many single-file contributions from about 40
different authors.

Should I list all these authors in debian/copyright, or can I do like
it's done for the Linux kernel:

Files: *
Copyright: 1991-2012 Linus Torvalds and many others
License: GPL-2

hence writing:

Files: lua/lexers/*
Copyright: 2007-2016 Mitchell  and many others
License: MIT

What do you suggest?

Paride