Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-22 Thread Brian May
Sandro Tosi writes: > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:01 PM, Brian May wrote: >> Maybe we should fix #801666 first and then revisit this question? > > git-dpm hasnt seen a single line changed since more than a year >

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-22 Thread Julien Puydt
Le mercredi 21 oct. 2015 à 23:28:47 (+0100), Sandro Tosi a écrit : > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:01 PM, Brian May wrote: > > Maybe we should fix #801666 first and then revisit this question? > > git-dpm hasnt seen a single line changed since more than a year >

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-22 Thread Piotr Ożarowski
you guys had plenty of time to propose something else, you stil have, it's easy: just do the work which was done for git-dpm migration If you just want to whine, then SHUT UP or go fix git-dpm or pristine-tar instead! It's not democracy, it's DOocracy so spend your time on reporting bugs or

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-22 Thread Raphael Hertzog
On Wed, 21 Oct 2015, Sandro Tosi wrote: > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:01 PM, Brian May wrote: > > Maybe we should fix #801666 first and then revisit this question? > > git-dpm hasnt seen a single line changed since more than a year >

pristine-tar (was: Git migration schedule)

2015-10-22 Thread W. Martin Borgert
Quoting Julien Puydt : Do you know pristine-tar is orphaned ? (bug #737871) This is known to readers of this mailing list, e.g. https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2014/10/msg00039.html So far, it just seems to work for (most of?) us. Cheers

Re: pristine-tar (was: Git migration schedule)

2015-10-22 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Oct 22, 2015, at 01:04 PM, W. Martin Borgert wrote: >So far, it just seems to work for (most of?) us. Yep, pretty much. Cheers, -Barry

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-22 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Oct 22, 2015, at 09:09 AM, Raphael Hertzog wrote: >Yeah :( That makes another point that was missed in the evaluation of >git-dpm vs git-buildpackage and its "gpb pq" command. When we started down this road, `gbp pq` was pretty unusable and git-dpm was much better (IMHO, others who did

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-21 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Oct 21, 2015, at 08:36 AM, Sandro Tosi wrote: >I need to backport quite some packages, and use often experimental to >stage big packages new releases (think of numpy and matplotlib) so it >is not a rare situation at all and it should be considered now that we >are at the beginning of a new era

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-21 Thread Sandro Tosi
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Oct 21, 2015, at 08:36 AM, Sandro Tosi wrote: > >>I need to backport quite some packages, and use often experimental to >>stage big packages new releases (think of numpy and matplotlib) so it >>is not a rare situation at

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-21 Thread Brian May
Sandro Tosi writes: > I dont know if this integrates easily with git-dpm though (from a very > high level, it seems they have some incompatibilities in particular on > how git-dpm keep tracks of the upstream source) Maybe we should fix #801666 first and then revisit this

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-21 Thread Sandro Tosi
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:01 PM, Brian May wrote: > Maybe we should fix #801666 first and then revisit this question? git-dpm hasnt seen a single line changed since more than a year (http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/git-dpm/git-dpm.git/) so I wont hold my breath on it :( --

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-21 Thread Sandro Tosi
> It does seem like DEP-14 has thought of these complications. My concern is > that these should be rare so it seems nicer to optimize for the common > (simple) case and allow for the more complicated branch names when needed. I need to backport quite some packages, and use often experimental to

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-21 Thread Raphael Hertzog
On Tue, 20 Oct 2015, Brian May wrote: > Barry Warsaw writes: > > > Now, in practice, it doesn't matter if you ignore git-dpm and just use quilt > > *as long as the final state of the repo is compatible with git-dpm*. > > Meaning, > > in general, you can make whatever local

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-20 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Oct 20, 2015, at 08:30 AM, Brian May wrote: >I suspect some packages may end up needing DEP-14 names for security >fixes and backports. Possibly so. >The problem here is with the naming of the upstream branches is >different. Although security updates and backports are unlikely to use >new

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-19 Thread Brian May
Barry Warsaw writes: > My personal opinion is that we should live with the current git workflow > recommendations for a while and see how it goes. If there are things we can > improve on (e.g. DEP-14 compatibility) then sure, let's discuss the pros and > cons, but let's not

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-19 Thread Brian May
Barry Warsaw writes: > Now, in practice, it doesn't matter if you ignore git-dpm and just use quilt > *as long as the final state of the repo is compatible with git-dpm*. Meaning, > in general, you can make whatever local decisions you want as long as they > don't force other

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-19 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Oct 18, 2015, at 07:19 PM, Jean-Michel Vourgère wrote: >Git multiple remotes is a nice feature. We can plug right into upstream >tree. Currently, our git workflow is tarball-based, since we primarily package PyPI releases, which are tarball-centric, and because orig.tar is required for

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-17 Thread Sandro Tosi
On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 9:26 AM, Stefano Rivera wrote: > Hi Barry (2015.10.10_21:02:00_+0200) >> I don't want to wiki-churn so what do you think about backing out this change >> and suggesting the ssh config instead? > > I'd suggest ssh config too. +1. +1 on .ssh/config, I'm

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-12 Thread Raphael Hertzog
On Sun, 11 Oct 2015, Brian May wrote: > What branches do I need to put the debian/README.source file in? There are > six debian/* branches, don't think it is a good idea to try and maintain a > consistent debian/README.source in all branches. > > Maybe debian/experimental would be sufficient? Or

Re: Git migration schedule pushback permissions/DEP-3 workflow

2015-10-12 Thread Daniel Stender
On 08.10.2015 17:06, Stefano Rivera wrote: > Hi Barry (2015.10.02_16:24:28_+0200) >> 8-Oct - Assuming no objections or showstoppers, turn off write access to all >> of DPMT svn. > > Done. And kicking off the migration now... > > SR Thanks for the work, things likes automatically updated Vcs

Re: Git migration schedule pushback permissions/DEP-3 workflow

2015-10-12 Thread Daniele Tricoli
On Monday, October 12, 2015 08:13:41 PM Daniel Stender wrote: > I've got a push back error here: > > $ git push > Counting objects: 22, done. > Delta compression using up to 4 threads. > Compressing objects: 100% (21/21), done. > Writing objects: 100% (22/22), 2.72 KiB | 0 bytes/s, done. > Total

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-11 Thread Stefano Rivera
Hi Brian (2015.10.10_00:22:09_+0200) > what about "Merge SVN"? Is this the same thing or different? The svn history goes beyond the most recent upload to the archive, but couldn't be automatically merged into the upload history. > What is "Orphaned tags"? There were tags that aren't linked into

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-11 Thread Stefano Rivera
Hi Barry (2015.10.10_21:02:00_+0200) > I don't want to wiki-churn so what do you think about backing out this change > and suggesting the ssh config instead? I'd suggest ssh config too. +1. SR -- Stefano Rivera http://tumbleweed.org.za/ +1 415 683 3272

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-10 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Oct 10, 2015, at 12:18 PM, Ben Finney wrote: >You need to specify which username to connect to over SSH. I have >updated the Wiki page above to clarify this. Hmm, I'm not sure about this recommendation. I don't include my user name in the url, and I'm pretty sure Mattia's suggestion to set

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-10 Thread IOhannes m zmölnig
On 10/10/2015 12:16 AM, Brian May wrote: > On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 at 00:24 Barry Warsaw wrote: > >> 5-Oct - Do one last test run with an updated svn dump. Put the results in >> a >> public place for folks to play with and comment on. >> >> 8-Oct - Assuming no objections or

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-10 Thread Brian May
On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 at 09:55 Barry Warsaw wrote: > Probably so. I have a checkout of python-django here and it seems to > already > be in git. I haven't looked at the converted svn->git repo yet, but I'm > wondering if what was converted was just old and out of date? I'm

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-09 Thread Stefano Rivera
Hi Barry (2015.10.05_17:36:05_+0200) > Is there some documentation on how to use these scripts, or set up mr? Or > would that be obvious for anybody who's used mr before? Fairly obvious. It's pretty simple. > Can you add something about mr to https://wiki.debian.org/Python/GitPackaging Here:

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-09 Thread Mattia Rizzolo
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 12:18:20PM +1100, Ben Finney wrote: > Brian May writes: > > > On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 at 19:26 Stefano Rivera wrote: > > > > > > > > Here: > > >

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-09 Thread Brian May
On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 at 18:58 Stefano Rivera wrote: > It migrated everything that's in SVN. What happens to the result is up > to us. We can replace migrated results with existing git packages. > Ok, I probably should create another thread to discuss this for Django then.

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-09 Thread Brian May
On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 at 00:24 Barry Warsaw wrote: > 5-Oct - Do one last test run with an updated svn dump. Put the results in > a > public place for folks to play with and comment on. > > 8-Oct - Assuming no objections or showstoppers, turn off write access to > all > of DPMT

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-09 Thread Brian May
On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 at 19:01 Stefano Rivera wrote: > Things that need to be looked at: > http://whiteboard.debian.net/dpmt-git-migration.wb > Not sure what the headings mean. "Git packages moved out the way" seems obvious - and probably exactly what I mentioned before with

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-09 Thread Brian May
On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 at 19:26 Stefano Rivera wrote: > > Here: > https://wiki.debian.org/Python/GitPackaging#Where_do_the_team.27s_git_branches_live.3F > > I seem to have problems with this because my username on my local box is "brian" however my username on git.debian.org is

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-09 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Oct 09, 2015, at 10:30 PM, Brian May wrote: >Ok, I probably should create another thread to discuss this for Django then. > >Also, contrary to the rules we just agreed on, this sounds like one rare >time when all uploaders should be contacted before moving any repositories >around. Probably

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-09 Thread Arthur de Jong
On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 10:47 -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote: > I'd also like to send an email to debian-devel@ inviting people who > may have abandoned the DPMT because of our use of subversion, to come > back to the team. Perhaps an email to d-d-announce would be in order. I for one don't regularly

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-09 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Oct 09, 2015, at 06:46 PM, Arthur de Jong wrote: >Perhaps an email to d-d-announce would be in order. Good idea, thanks. -Barry pgpt4EKqpYkKX.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-09 Thread Arthur de Jong
On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 13:34 -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Oct 09, 2015, at 06:46 PM, Arthur de Jong wrote: > > Perhaps an email to d-d-announce would be in order. > > Good idea, thanks. Thanks everyone for the hard work. Time for me to learn a new tool ;) -- -- arthur - adej...@debian.org -

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-09 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Oct 09, 2015, at 10:01 AM, Stefano Rivera wrote: >And it's done. \o/ Thank you for all your amazing work on this Stefano! >Things that need to be looked at: >http://whiteboard.debian.net/dpmt-git-migration.wb > >Please mark them off if you've looked at them. I've done an updating pass

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-08 Thread Stefano Rivera
Hi Barry (2015.10.02_16:24:28_+0200) > 8-Oct - Assuming no objections or showstoppers, turn off write access to all > of DPMT svn. Done. And kicking off the migration now... SR -- Stefano Rivera http://tumbleweed.org.za/ +1 415 683 3272

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-08 Thread Brian May
On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 at 02:06 Stefano Rivera wrote: > Done. And kicking off the migration now... > Great! Will the migration do packages like python-django? Just thinking that python-django in subversion is old, and the version in git doesn't (yet) use git-dpm; you don't

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-06 Thread Debian/GNU
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-10-05 23:24, Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Oct 05, 2015, at 10:36 PM, Stefano Rivera wrote: > >> How about: We move away existing repositories, and put the >> migrated ones in the /packages/ path. If people have existing >> repositories, that

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-05 Thread Daniel Stender
Hi, these old SVN repos could be spared and removed: On 03.10.2015 20:52, Stefano Rivera wrote: > The errors: > > Cannot "git-dpm init" package: gamera is already in: git://anonscm.debian.org/python-modules/packages/gamera.git > Cannot "git-dpm init" package: nltk old/obsolete packaging, the

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-05 Thread Stefano Rivera
Hi Barry (2015.10.05_17:51:41_+0200) > >and other 9, for a grand total of 109 packages that cannot be > >converted to git, 13.5% of DPMT (oh, what about PAPT?) > > I've wondered about PAPT too. I don't touch those nearly as often, but > eventually yes, they should come under the same vcs regime,

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-05 Thread Stefano Rivera
Hi IOhannes (2015.10.05_12:07:33_+0200) > >> sorry, i forgot to ask another question: how will the packages > >> already maintained in git be handled? > > > > Up to their maintainers (assuming they're following team > > standards). If people only have one git package, for testing, each, > > then

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-05 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Oct 05, 2015, at 10:36 PM, Stefano Rivera wrote: >How about: We move away existing repositories, and put the migrated ones >in the /packages/ path. If people have existing repositories, that >they'd prefer to use, they can move the migrated ones out the way, and >theirs back. But they have to

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-05 Thread Brian May
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 02:49 Barry Warsaw wrote: > Waiting longer isn't an option IMHO. It's helping to add to the > dysfunction > of the team. I will also offer to help if the 3.5 transition gets stuck > because of the git conversion. > Hurry up and break my packages :-) Do

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-05 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Oct 05, 2015, at 10:32 PM, Stefano Rivera wrote: >Hi Barry (2015.10.05_17:51:41_+0200) >> >and other 9, for a grand total of 109 packages that cannot be >> >converted to git, 13.5% of DPMT (oh, what about PAPT?) >> >> I've wondered about PAPT too. I don't touch those nearly as often, but >>

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-05 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Oct 05, 2015, at 07:12 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: >I did an update (not uploaded) of webob from this migration and it worked >perfectly. But it's a simple package without patches. I'll try a few more. Similarly for ply 3.8. The nice thing here is that there were several quilt patches that got

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-05 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Oct 03, 2015, at 08:52 PM, Stefano Rivera wrote: >So, here is a migration at r34461: >https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/python-modules/svn-migration/ I did an update (not uploaded) of webob from this migration and it worked perfectly. But it's a simple package without patches. I'll try a few

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-05 Thread Debian/GNU
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-10-04 23:06, Stefano Rivera wrote: > Hi Sandro (2015.10.04_21:31:07_+0200) >> sorry, i forgot to ask another question: how will the packages >> already maintained in git be handled? > > Up to their maintainers (assuming they're following

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-05 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Oct 04, 2015, at 08:03 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote: >am I the only one thinking it's quite a huge number to be handled by >hand? and whose hands will be the ones converting these packages? >yours or Barry's dont seem enough and others will need training/time. I'm happy to pitch in if a maintainer

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-05 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Oct 04, 2015, at 08:31 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote: >sorry, i forgot to ask another question: how will the packages already >maintained in git be handled? It should be easy. Just push it to the team's vcs. If it's not already in git-dpm it's pretty easy to bootstrap. Essentially just one call to

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-05 Thread Scott Kitterman
On Monday, October 05, 2015 11:49:01 AM Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Oct 04, 2015, at 08:03 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote: > >am I the only one thinking it's quite a huge number to be handled by > >hand? and whose hands will be the ones converting these packages? > >yours or Barry's dont seem enough and

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-05 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Oct 03, 2015, at 08:52 PM, Stefano Rivera wrote: >No significant failures, but I wanted to setup an mr config, which I've done >now: >https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/python-modules/svn-migration/python-modules.git/ >The pkg-perl team has fancier tools, but they require more bookkeeping, so I

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-05 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Oct 03, 2015, at 08:52 PM, Stefano Rivera wrote: >So, here is a migration at r34461: >https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/python-modules/svn-migration/ > >The errors: Some of these may already be in git, and hopefully git-dpm so don't actually need a conversion. If it's in git but not git-dpm,

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-05 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Oct 04, 2015, at 08:03 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote: >and other 9, for a grand total of 109 packages that cannot be >converted to git, 13.5% of DPMT (oh, what about PAPT?) I've wondered about PAPT too. I don't touch those nearly as often, but eventually yes, they should come under the same vcs

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-04 Thread Sandro Tosi
sorry, i forgot to ask another question: how will the packages already maintained in git be handled? On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 8:03 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote: > On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 7:52 PM, Stefano Rivera wrote: >> The errors: >> >> Cannot "git-dpm init"

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-04 Thread Sandro Tosi
On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 7:52 PM, Stefano Rivera wrote: > The errors: > > Cannot "git-dpm init" package: adhocracy [8<] > Cannot "git-dpm init" package: urlgrabber those are 98 packages > I think these are mostly because the package has never been uploaded to > Debian, or has

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-04 Thread Julien Puydt
Hi, Le dimanche 04 oct. 2015 à 20:03:29 (+0100), Sandro Tosi a écrit : > am I the only one thinking it's quite a huge number to be handled by > hand? and whose hands will be the ones converting these packages? > yours or Barry's dont seem enough and others will need training/time. There's a

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-04 Thread Stefano Rivera
Hi Sandro (2015.10.04_21:03:29_+0200) > and other 9, for a grand total of 109 packages that cannot be > converted to git, 13.5% of DPMT (oh, what about PAPT?) They're all converted. There are just some remaining steps to do by hand, to reconcile the SVN history with upstream history, and convert

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-04 Thread Stefano Rivera
Hi Sandro (2015.10.04_21:31:07_+0200) > sorry, i forgot to ask another question: how will the packages already > maintained in git be handled? Up to their maintainers (assuming they're following team standards). If people only have one git package, for testing, each, then this shouldn't be an

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-03 Thread Sandro Tosi
> A good way to test that (when Stefano puts up the next test conversion) is to > make some change, then `git-dpm tag` and verify that the tag form is correct. > Be sure you don't have any settings in ~/.gitconfig though. if the last is a strong requirement, honestly it seems fragile:

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-03 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Oct 03, 2015, at 11:47 AM, Sandro Tosi wrote: >what were the problems that -in the last period- delayed the conversion? were >they just lack of time (understandable) or were they technical in the >conversion process? The very last patch I forwarded to Stefano involved correctly setting the

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-03 Thread Stefano Rivera
Hi Daniele (2015.10.03_21:36:52_+0200) > charade was fortunately merged into chardet so we can also remove the SVN > repository (or ignore it). Yeah, I think there'll be a bunch of those. I basically migrated everything from the SVN history, that didn't break horrifically. Then we can strip it

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-03 Thread Daniele Tricoli
Hello Stefano, many thanks for working on this! On Saturday 03 October 2015 20:52:21 Stefano Rivera wrote: [CUT list of packages] > Cannot "git-dpm init" package: python-charade charade was fortunately merged into chardet so we can also remove the SVN repository (or ignore it). Cheers, --

Re: Git migration schedule

2015-10-03 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Oct 03, 2015, at 03:50 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote: >if the last is a strong requirement, honestly it seems fragile: ~/.gitconfig >applies to all the git repos I have (and I may want to specify a tag format >there), while what is set in debian/.git-dpm (is this the file where the tag >format is set