Bug#900679: nmu: Migrating developers-reference to Salsa and minor updates
On 03/06/18 at 20:15 +0200, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 04:55:01PM +0100, Sean Whitton wrote: > > > I even dare to say there is no "devref maintainers" team at all, and > > > that if you actually wish to work on it you should go ahead, add > > > yourself to uploaders and do stuff. > > > > And he is not inactive in Debian. > > Yes, it was even me who filed the "please update the uploaders field" > bug for removing he, but the current maintainers didn't act on that bug. > > > There was an upload by the current maintainer less than six months ago. > > It would surely be a hijack to add to > > uploaders without his explicit agreement. > > You are talking about Hideki, whom "added himself" without much talking > on this list, if my memory serves correctly. > Anyway, CCing him here to see whether he would be fine with having a new > comaintainer (tbh, I'm not sure he is receiving the bug mails in any > way). Also CCing lucas… Hi, Given the current state of dev-ref maintenance, I think that any maintenance is better than the current state. So please go ahead! Lucas
Bug#900679: nmu: Migrating developers-reference to Salsa and minor updates
On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 07:13:47PM +0200, Aurélien COUDERC wrote: > Sounds good to me. > I've made you co-owner of the def ref editors group so please go ahead with > moving it to the Debian group. > > I'm DM so I'd be interested in you giving me commit rights on the repo after > the move. Done => https://salsa.debian.org/debian/developers-reference And added you to the project. -- regards, Mattia Rizzolo GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`. more about me: https://mapreri.org : :' : Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'` Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `- signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#900679: nmu: Migrating developers-reference to Salsa and minor updates
On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 04:55:01PM +0100, Sean Whitton wrote: > > I even dare to say there is no "devref maintainers" team at all, and > > that if you actually wish to work on it you should go ahead, add > > yourself to uploaders and do stuff. > > And he is not inactive in Debian. Yes, it was even me who filed the "please update the uploaders field" bug for removing he, but the current maintainers didn't act on that bug. > There was an upload by the current maintainer less than six months ago. > It would surely be a hijack to add to > uploaders without his explicit agreement. You are talking about Hideki, whom "added himself" without much talking on this list, if my memory serves correctly. Anyway, CCing him here to see whether he would be fine with having a new comaintainer (tbh, I'm not sure he is receiving the bug mails in any way). Also CCing lucas… -- regards, Mattia Rizzolo GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`. more about me: https://mapreri.org : :' : Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'` Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `- signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#900679: nmu: Migrating developers-reference to Salsa and minor updates
Le 3 juin 2018 17:55:01 GMT+02:00, Sean Whitton a écrit : >Hello Mattia, > >On Sun, Jun 03 2018, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: >> I even dare to say there is no "devref maintainers" team at all, and >> that if you actually wish to work on it you should go ahead, add >> yourself to uploaders and do stuff. > >There was an upload by the current maintainer less than six months ago. >And he is not inactive in Debian. It would surely be a hijack to add >to >uploaders without his explicit agreement. I certainly don't want to make it look like a hijack, thus the NMU bug and me reverting the changes previously done on master on the migrated repo. Besides there's no hurry. :-) Cheers, -- Aurélien
Bug#900679: nmu: Migrating developers-reference to Salsa and minor updates
Hi Mattia, Le 3 juin 2018 12:29:46 GMT+02:00, Mattia Rizzolo a écrit : >On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 12:01:44PM +0200, Aurélien COUDERC wrote: >> The repository is already up on Salsa at [0]. >> I’ve left the master branch untouched as was on Alioth and created an >> nmu-3.4.19 branch with the changes above. >> The complete diff is at [1]. >> >> >> [0] https://salsa.debian.org/dev-ref-team/developers-reference/ >> [1] https://salsa.debian.org/dev-ref-team/developers- >> reference/compare/debian%2F3.4.19...nmu-3.4.19 > >tbh, I'd put the repo on the debian group. >devref has been quite poorly maintained in the last years, and most of >the changes effectively happened because a random DD with an interest >in updating a specific section just committed stuff and added >themselves to the uploaders list. Sounds good to me. I've made you co-owner of the def ref editors group so please go ahead with moving it to the Debian group. I'm DM so I'd be interested in you giving me commit rights on the repo after the move. >Incidentally, what's your interest for working on devref? Surely you >have some other goal other than those very very minor changes… Yes, I do find dev-ref a valuable source of information and I'm newcomer enough that I'd like to contribute to its maintenance. Cheers, -- Aurélien
Bug#900679: nmu: Migrating developers-reference to Salsa and minor updates
Hello Mattia, On Sun, Jun 03 2018, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > tbh, I'd put the repo on the debian group. Agreed. > I even dare to say there is no "devref maintainers" team at all, and > that if you actually wish to work on it you should go ahead, add > yourself to uploaders and do stuff. There was an upload by the current maintainer less than six months ago. And he is not inactive in Debian. It would surely be a hijack to add to uploaders without his explicit agreement. -- Sean Whitton signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#900511: libcurl4 Conflicts: libcurl3
On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 10:12:22AM -0400, Marvin Renich wrote: > * Russ Allbery [180602 22:41]: >... > > or we'd need to call our version libcurl5 or something, > > which would break compatibility with everyone else. > > That's almost what I meant. Upstream should recognize that in spite of > their strong statements about not _ever_ breaking ABI, their exposure of > openssl 1.1 structure has, indeed, broken ABI and they should be > responsible and admit it and bump SONAME. (This is all based on my > much-less-than-expert understanding of the discussion; my opinion might > be way off here.) If I'm right, though, this would make everyone happy; > all distributions would have libcurl5, our libcurl3/4 mix could stay as > is, and no Conflicts would be necessary. This would have been a valid point 2 years ago when OpenSSL 1.1 support was added to libcurl. Today with everyone else (including the current Ubuntu LTS) already using libcurl4 with OpenSSL 1.1 this is moot. > ...Marvin cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
Re: Bug#900511: libcurl4 Conflicts: libcurl3
* Russ Allbery [180602 22:41]: > Marvin Renich writes: > > I'm not convinced that this shouldn't have resulted in an SONAME bump, > > and Steve Langasek also seems to think this should have been handled > > differently, but everyone else seems to be happy with the current > > solution. > > I don't think Steve is making the point that it first appears he is. His Okay. > or we'd need to call our version libcurl5 or something, > which would break compatibility with everyone else. That's almost what I meant. Upstream should recognize that in spite of their strong statements about not _ever_ breaking ABI, their exposure of openssl 1.1 structure has, indeed, broken ABI and they should be responsible and admit it and bump SONAME. (This is all based on my much-less-than-expert understanding of the discussion; my opinion might be way off here.) If I'm right, though, this would make everyone happy; all distributions would have libcurl5, our libcurl3/4 mix could stay as is, and no Conflicts would be necessary. ...Marvin
Bug#900679: nmu: Migrating developers-reference to Salsa and minor updates
On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 12:01:44PM +0200, Aurélien COUDERC wrote: > The repository is already up on Salsa at [0]. > I’ve left the master branch untouched as was on Alioth and created an > nmu-3.4.19 branch with the changes above. > The complete diff is at [1]. > > > [0] https://salsa.debian.org/dev-ref-team/developers-reference/ > [1] https://salsa.debian.org/dev-ref-team/developers- > reference/compare/debian%2F3.4.19...nmu-3.4.19 tbh, I'd put the repo on the debian group. devref has been quite poorly maintained in the last years, and most of the changes effectively happened because a random DD with an interest in updating a specific section just committed stuff and added themselves to the uploaders list. > Feel free to say if you think this is not a good idea or would better be done > differently. I even dare to say there is no "devref maintainers" team at all, and that if you actually wish to work on it you should go ahead, add yourself to uploaders and do stuff. Incidentally, what's your interest for working on devref? Surely you have some other goal other than those very very minor changes… -- regards, Mattia Rizzolo GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`. more about me: https://mapreri.org : :' : Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'` Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `- signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#900679: nmu: Migrating developers-reference to Salsa and minor updates
Package: developers-reference Version: 3.4.19 Severity: normal Dear Maintainer, I would like to NMU developers-reference for migrating the repository to Salsa and a couple of minor changes. The complete changelog would be : developers-reference (3.4.19+nmu1) UNRELEASED; urgency=medium [ Aurélien COUDERC ] * Non-maintainer upload. * Move repository to Salsa, update Vcs-* fields. * d/control: Bump Standards-Version to 4.1.4, no change needed. * Fix CSS text color to avoid the HTML version being unreadable when using a light on dark default browser stylesheet. -- Aurélien COUDERC Thu, 31 May 2018 23:17:33 +0200 The repository is already up on Salsa at [0]. I’ve left the master branch untouched as was on Alioth and created an nmu-3.4.19 branch with the changes above. The complete diff is at [1]. [0] https://salsa.debian.org/dev-ref-team/developers-reference/ [1] https://salsa.debian.org/dev-ref-team/developers- reference/compare/debian%2F3.4.19...nmu-3.4.19 Feel free to say if you think this is not a good idea or would better be done differently. Cheers, -- Aurélien -- System Information: Debian Release: buster/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing'), (200, 'unstable'), (150, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 4.17.0-rc3-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=fr (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) LSM: AppArmor: enabled developers-reference depends on no packages. Versions of packages developers-reference recommends: ii debian-policy 4.1.4.1 Versions of packages developers-reference suggests: ii doc-base 0.10.8 -- no debconf information -- debsums errors found: debsums: changed file /usr/share/doc/developers-reference/developers-reference.css (from developers-reference package)
