forgot to reply to all.
Forwarded Message
Subject: Re: Bug#801253: O: wicd -- wired and wireless network manager
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 12:18:34 +0100 (CET)
From: toogley <toog...@mailbox.org>
To: Gianfranco Costamagna <costamagnagianfra...@yahoo.it>
wicd has
[PS: I thought i had sent a summarizing email to the wicd-devel which i
didn't. Therefore, i don't know what Tom van Braeckel would think about
this topic. But at least i've correctly resent that email. ]
[...] although with "inactivity" i meant rather actively developing new
features etc
Hi
>i won't adopt the maintainership for wicd, mainly because of upstream's
>inactivity. Basically, it seems that Tom van Braeckel is the only
>contributer currently, who doesn't have the time and priority to
>actively develop wicd. Therefore i don't see in wicd a future.
wicd has been
Hey.
i won't adopt the maintainership for wicd, mainly because of upstream's
inactivity. Basically, it seems that Tom van Braeckel is the only
contributer currently, who doesn't have the time and priority to
actively develop wicd. Therefore i don't see in wicd a future.
I'm really
Hi toogley,
toogley wrote:
> i won't adopt the maintainership for wicd, mainly because of
> upstream's inactivity.
Thanks for your contributions nevertheless!
> I'm really interested in the technology, as well as debian
> packaging Hence, I'll ask in other debian teams/packages for
>
Hey.
I can't reproduce #758737
(https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=758737)
According to https://bugs.launchpad.net/wicd/+bug/1232521 it was not
fixed by upstream yet.
Did i make a mistake? If no, should i message the commands below to
758737-submit...@bugs.debian.org with a
Hey,
what exactly needs to be changed in the package to be uploaded in
unstable? Or what is the reason for waiting some time before changing
from "UNRELEASED" to "unstable" inside the debian changelog file?
On 01/26/2016 02:24 PM, Axel Beckert wrote:
Hi,
toogley wrote:
does it bother,
On 02/01/2016 09:11 PM, Axel Beckert wrote:
> In general or in case of wicd as of now?
i'm interested in both, so thanks for answering it :)
On 02/01/2016 09:11 PM, Axel Beckert wrote:
> And the uploads 1.7.3-1 and 1.7.3-2 have shown that this probably was
> a good idea. ;-)
Do you mean
Hi,
toogley wrote:
> On 02/01/2016 09:11 PM, Axel Beckert wrote:
> > And the uploads 1.7.3-1 and 1.7.3-2 have shown that this probably was
> > a good idea. ;-)
>
> Do you mean because of the big amount of fixed bugs?
Because quite some severe bugs were found in the first two uploads.
There
On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 09:11:12PM +0100, Axel Beckert wrote:
> There though may be other reasons why a package is held back from
> migrating to testing, e.g. if a package it depends on or build-depends
> on, hasn't migrated to testing yet.
Just to be picky, build-dependencies are not considered
Hi,
toogley wrote:
> what exactly needs to be changed in the package to be uploaded in
> unstable?
In general or in case of wicd as of now? In general there can be many
reasons. A common one is though the one which currently applies to wicd:
I want to wait with the next upload until the current
additionally: is it harmful for users/debian/wicd/whatever, when i work
at a particular problem regarding the wicd package with a delay of 2,3,4
weeks?
i mean, of course i intend to work regularly(=at least every week) on
wicd, but just to be sure..^^
On 01/26/2016 01:44 PM, toogley wrote:
Hi,
toogley wrote:
> does it bother, when i work at the package within a delay of a week at most?
If it doesn't bother that I work on the package, too.
At least I want to fix the things I broke with the initial 1.7.3
upload. :-)
> @Axel:
>
> May i import + upload the next version of wicd
does it bother, when i work at the package within a delay of a week at most?
@Axel:
May i import + upload the next version of wicd (which is 1.7.5, i think)?
https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/rb-pkg/unstable/amd64/wicd.html
says, the package building has failed, because of "dpkg-source:
https://github.com/toogley/pkg-wicd/commit/b2931ca51f831369ec2854b20b523ba9db42546a
On 01/17/2016 06:06 PM, Axel Beckert wrote:
Hi,
toogley wrote:
On 01/17/2016 04:32 PM, toogley wrote:
What do you mean by "uploaded packages" ? the upstream release (on
launchpad)?
No, I meant that no
Hey,
thanks. Additionally, i've found https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/wicd
which is fairly useful.
On 01/17/2016 02:40 AM, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
Hi,
generally speaking, what can i do in maintaining the wicd package, exept
fixing bugs (e.g. also the todo bug listed in the changelog)
Hi,
toogley wrote:
> The commit ff299c3 has merged the upstream version 1.7.3 into
> master, but https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/wicd says, we still need
> to merge it in. What is wrong here? Do i missunderstand sth?
https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/wicd as well as the predecessor
Hey,
The commit ff299c3 has merged the upstream version 1.7.3 into master,
but https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/wicd says, we still need to merge it
in. What is wrong here? Do i missunderstand sth?
What do you mean by "uploaded packages" ? the upstream release (on
launchpad)?
On 01/17/2016 04:26 PM, Axel Beckert wrote:
Hi,
toogley wrote:
The commit ff299c3 has merged the upstream version 1.7.3 into
master, but https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/wicd says, we still need
to merge it in. What
Ah, sry. I missunderstood you. You mean it's not in unstable yet and
therefore it complains.
On 01/17/2016 04:32 PM, toogley wrote:
What do you mean by "uploaded packages" ? the upstream release (on
launchpad)?
On 01/17/2016 04:26 PM, Axel Beckert wrote:
Hi,
toogley wrote:
The commit
Hi,
toogley wrote:
> On 01/17/2016 04:32 PM, toogley wrote:
> >What do you mean by "uploaded packages" ? the upstream release (on
> >launchpad)?
No, I meant that no package for 1.7.3 has been uploaded to Debian
Unstable yet.
> Ah, sry. I missunderstood you. You mean it's not in unstable yet and
why has the debian/patches dir in stretch more patches than in master,
since the master branch is merged into stretch?
On 01/17/2016 04:26 PM, Axel Beckert wrote:
Hi,
toogley wrote:
The commit ff299c3 has merged the upstream version 1.7.3 into
master, but
Not sure. The translators seem active:
https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~wicd-devel/wicd/experimental/changes/954?start_revid=954
There seems no code change since March anymore. But that's less than a
year ago, so it's hard to say.
well, i have to admit i haven't checked the activity before
sorry. i don't understand this point: You say, i should correct my
changelog.
Not really. It was primarily meant as advice for the next time. :-)
You can fix it if you want, though, but you don't need to. (I should
have been more explicit in this regard...)
I did understand it as an
Hey,
generally speaking, what can i do in maintaining the wicd package, exept
fixing bugs (e.g. also the todo bug listed in the changelog) and
uploading new upstream versions?
Hi,
>generally speaking, what can i do in maintaining the wicd package, exept
>fixing bugs (e.g. also the todo bug listed in the changelog) and
>uploading new upstream versions?
fixing bugs and keeping the package up-to-date, is so far the best
thing you can do with the package (as
Hi,
>my first commit:
>https://github.com/toogley/pkg-wicd/commit/4ade5ad71c1c50be9cd3748742042ff34a428fb1
>why do you say the "main development" is done in master, and not in
>stretch, as stretch is merged into stable after a while?
no, master is usually what is uploaded in unstable.
After
Hi Toogley,
toogley wrote:
> my first commit:
> https://github.com/toogley/pkg-wicd/commit/4ade5ad71c1c50be9cd3748742042ff34a428fb1
Yay.
It though shows that some things are not yet clear. Let me try to
explain them:
All files under debian/patches/ (except "series") are for patching
upstream
Hey,
my first commit:
https://github.com/toogley/pkg-wicd/commit/4ade5ad71c1c50be9cd3748742042ff34a428fb1
==> Can you give me feedback, please? :)
why do you say the "main development" is done in master, and not in
stretch, as stretch is merged into stable after a while?
==> we would then
oh, i've just overlooked that part of your explanation regarding the
master/sid branch...
On 01/15/2016 07:33 PM, toogley wrote:
Hi Gianfranco, Hi Axel,
So, the master branch represents sid in the wicd repo?
sry for the missunderstanding^^
> since you changed something in debian
On 01/15/2016 08:00 PM, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
orig tarball doesn't have the same source anymore,
Could you please explain that?
> orig tarball doesn't have the same source anymore,
Could you please explain that?
the source tree has the same content has the orig.tar.gz tarball.
if you commit a change outside the debian directory), the content changes
simple as this.
So, you can commit only changes in debian
Hi Gianfranco, Hi Axel,
So, the master branch represents sid in the wicd repo?
sry for the missunderstanding^^
> since you changed something in debian directory, you can just commit
> and live happy.
What do you mean by that? I mean, if i revert/correct my changes with
another commit,
Hi,
>oh, i've just overlooked that part of your explanation regarding the
>master/sid branch...
lol wonderful!
> What do you mean by that? I mean, if i revert/correct my changes with
> another commit, doesn't that lead to a confusing git history, as my
> commit was not correct?
everybody
On 01/15/2016 06:20 PM, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
(look e.g. to virtualbox-ext-package source package, where I run
debconf-updatepo in clean target, just to
avoid such situations :) )
What file/commit/whatever are you referring to? I couldn't found sth
related in your git logs.
Hi
>But i haven't commited in the source directory, just in the debian one?
true!
cheers,
G.
On 01/15/2016 08:00 PM, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
The main issue is when you commit something in the source directory, then the
orig tarball doesn't have the same source anymore, and you have
dpkg-buildpackage
fail because of modified source.
But i haven't commited in the source
Hi,
toogley wrote:
> running "git buildpackage --git-debian-branch=master" in the branch
> master results in "gbp:error: upstream/1.7.3 is not a valid treeish"
> which doesn't make sense to me, as we obviously have a debian dir in
> the master branch. (I'm refering to
>
On 01/15/2016 08:21 PM, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
(look e.g. to virtualbox-ext-package source package, where I run
debconf-updatepo in clean target, just to
avoid such situations :) )
What file/commit/whatever are you referring to? I couldn't found sth
related in your git logs.
I mean
On 01/15/2016 10:36 PM, Axel Beckert wrote:
Only one small thing to nitpick: Usually the changelog items are added
at the bottom of the current entry. They may be grouped by
contributor, though, i.e. adding new items at the end of your item
group as you did here:
Hi again,
toogley wrote:
> On 01/15/2016 10:36 PM, Axel Beckert wrote:
> >Only one small thing to nitpick: Usually the changelog items are added
> >at the bottom of the current entry. They may be grouped by
> >contributor, though, i.e. adding new items at the end of your item
> >group as you did
Hi
>Can you please explain why you used dh_clean and not dh_build or sth
>similar? i mean, is there a specific reason?
acually the updatepo is something that needs to be done and committed on git.
during in dh-clean ensures you will run it from time to time (at least to create
a
Hi,
short note to all those people in the Cc: On the next iteration, I'll
drop all Cc except debian-mentors@lists.debian.org and the bug-report
itself. Feel free to object, to subscribe to the bug report or to
debian-mentors. :-)
toogley wrote:
> - my github repo contains all branches the debian
I don't mind - the rest of your email, i'll answer in the next days.
again, thank you :)
On 01/09/2016 03:57 PM, Axel Beckert wrote:
P.S. to Toogley: I might do a short-term QA upload of 1.7.3 to Debian
Unstable with what is currently in the master branch if the TODO in
debian/changelog has
Hi Gianfranco,
Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
> >The main reason why I haven't uploaded it as QA upload already is that
> >wicd-curses is slightly broken since 1.7.3. This likely requires
> >patching upstream code to get it fixed. See the TODO at
>
45 matches
Mail list logo