Bug#768073: [pkg-lxc-devel] Bug#768073: LXC team take over ITP?

[Clément Hermann]

Hi,

Time for a new status update, I guess.


On 04/12/2017 21:40, Clément Hermann wrote:
> So, I did some work on golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2
> 
> (#839748), since I had no answer.
> It should be fit for release but I would need someone (from the pkg-go
> team) to review and upload.
> 

It's been completely reworked, hopefully it can be reviewed and uploaded
soon.

> I also started working on golang-gopkg-lxc-go-lxc.v2-dev (ITP: #883488).
> 
> That's the last dependancy for LXD.
> 

And it's waiting for review and upload as well, in the pkg-go repository.

> So I started looking packaging LXD stable-2.0 as well, and asked to join
> the pkg-lxc team (pending approval).

Unfortunately I had no response so far... Ping ? My Alioth username is
nodens-guest.

> I think the best approach would be to not start from the ubuntu package,
> but instead, start from scratch, with dh-make-golang, so that we have
> proper initial packaging, and then integrate ubuntu work where needed.

That's what I started doing (only locally for now, since I'm not in the
team).

I decided to follow the new pkg-go workflow, for consistency with other
Go packages:

https://pkg-go.alioth.debian.org/workflow-changes.html

Of course, if people in the LXC team disagree, we can use a different one.


Cheers,

-- 
nodens

Bug#768073: LXC team take over ITP?

[Clément Hermann]

Hi !

Time for a status update on this one, hopefully !

On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 13:36:47 +0200 Clément Hermann
 wrote:

>
> I see there are only a couple dependancies left on the wiki page. Do you
> need help ?
> I'm not a Go expert, but I would really like to see LXD in Debian.
> (also, not a DM/DD - Yet! )
>
> I started looking at golang-gopkg-inconshreveable-log15.v2, the
> packaging should be straightforward enough apparently. I'm willing to do
> it if it helps.

This last one is not needed anymore.

So, I did some work on golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2

(#839748), since I had no answer.
It should be fit for release but I would need someone (from the pkg-go
team) to review and upload.

I also started working on golang-gopkg-lxc-go-lxc.v2-dev (ITP: #883488).

That's the last dependancy for LXD.

So I started looking packaging LXD stable-2.0 as well, and asked to join
the pkg-lxc team (pending approval).

I think the best approach would be to not start from the ubuntu package,
but instead, start from scratch, with dh-make-golang, so that we have
proper initial packaging, and then integrate ubuntu work where needed.


Cheers,

-- 
nodens

Bug#768073: [pkg-lxc-devel] Bug#768073: LXC team take over ITP?

[Clément Hermann]

Ooops. Sent using my work address, please use this one instead (but I'm
subscribed on both list so don't CC me if you reply on-list). Sorry for
the noise!

On 13/10/2017 13:36, Clément Hermann wrote:
> Hi !
> 
> On Wed, 15 Mar 2017 14:00:33 +0100 Evgeni Golov  wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 04:08:18PM +, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
>>> We packaged the following specifically as LXD dependencies which did
> go in:
>>>
>>> * https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.v3
>>> * https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/golang-petname
>>> (possibly others, hit-list was at https://wiki.debian.org/LXD)
>>
>> Thanks for that!
>>
> Thanks indeed :)
> 
> I see there are only a couple dependancies left on the wiki page. Do you
> need help ?
> I'm not a Go expert, but I would really like to see LXD in Debian.
> (also, not a DM/DD - Yet! )
> 
> I started looking at golang-gopkg-inconshreveable-log15.v2, the
> packaging should be straightforward enough apparently. I'm willing to do
> it if it helps.
> 
> Cheers,
> 

Bug#768073: LXC team take over ITP?

[Clément Hermann]

Hi !

On Wed, 15 Mar 2017 14:00:33 +0100 Evgeni Golov  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 04:08:18PM +, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> > We packaged the following specifically as LXD dependencies which did
go in:
> >
> > * https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.v3
> > * https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/golang-petname
> > (possibly others, hit-list was at https://wiki.debian.org/LXD)
>
> Thanks for that!
>
Thanks indeed :)

I see there are only a couple dependancies left on the wiki page. Do you
need help ?
I'm not a Go expert, but I would really like to see LXD in Debian.
(also, not a DM/DD - Yet! )

I started looking at golang-gopkg-inconshreveable-log15.v2, the
packaging should be straightforward enough apparently. I'm willing to do
it if it helps.

Cheers,

-- 

Clément Hermann
Senior Network System Engineer

VIRTUA.CH
T +41 21 544 28 00

FACEBOOK // http://l.virtua.ch/facebook
TWITTER  // http://l.virtua.ch/twitter
LINKEDIN // http://l.virtua.ch/linkedin

Bug#768073: [pkg-go] Bug#768073: LXC team take over ITP?

[Evgeni Golov]

Hi,

On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 04:08:18PM +, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> We packaged the following specifically as LXD dependencies which did go in:
> 
>  * https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.v3
>  * https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/golang-petname
>  (possibly others, hit-list was at https://wiki.debian.org/LXD)

Thanks for that!

> IMHO, and at least for the ones I did, I think we should file RC bugs to
> prevent these packages from going into stretch. They should stay in the
> archive/sid, for continued work on LXD, but I don't think that they are
> valuable on their own in the next release: it's just stuff that people
> might try to use that isn't being looked after properly (since the reason
> for them being there does not exist), taking up archive space and apt
> metadata space, etc.

Makes sense, yeah.

I will try to have a look at LXD during the credativ BSP this weekend,
noone says BSPs are limited to non-wnpp bugs :)

Cheers
Evgeni

Bug#768073: [pkg-go] Bug#768073: LXC team take over ITP?

[Jonathan Dowland]

Hi folks,

We didn't manage to get LXD into the archive in time for the freeze.

We packaged the following specifically as LXD dependencies which did go in:

 * https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.v3
 * https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/golang-petname
 (possibly others, hit-list was at https://wiki.debian.org/LXD)

IMHO, and at least for the ones I did, I think we should file RC bugs to
prevent these packages from going into stretch. They should stay in the
archive/sid, for continued work on LXD, but I don't think that they are
valuable on their own in the next release: it's just stuff that people
might try to use that isn't being looked after properly (since the reason
for them being there does not exist), taking up archive space and apt
metadata space, etc.

Thoughts?

-- 
Jonathan Dowland


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#768073: [pkg-go] Bug#768073: LXC team take over ITP?

[Jonathan Dowland]

Hi all,

I was pinged about this today which reminded me to post an update to the bug.

I'm unlikely to have enough time to finish packaging the rest of the 
dependencies
before the freeze deadline.

But the good news is we're very close anyway!

Zhenech has  golang-…-lxc.v2  imported to pkg-lxc but the tests are failing.

Clément identified that some of the other deps might already be packaged:

On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 01:33:53PM +0200, Clément Hermann wrote:
> >   Depends: golang-gopkg-inconshreveable-log15.v2-dev but it 
> > is not installable
> 
> From what I looked, this is a fork of
> golang-github-tendermint-log15-dev, which is the archive. There seem to
> be very few changes, so it might just work:
> https://github.com/inconshreveable/log15/compare/master...tendermint:master

So I'd encourage anyone else interested to jump in *now* to get the last 10% or
so done if possible!


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#768073: [pkg-go] Bug#768073: LXC team take over ITP?

[Clément Hermann]

Le 14 octobre 2016 13:33:53 GMT+02:00, "Clément Hermann"  a 
écrit :
>Le 14/10/2016 à 12:34, Jonathan Dowland a écrit :
>> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 02:11:13PM +0200, Martín Ferrari wrote:
>>> A few of these dependencies are already in the archive, not all have
>the
>>> standard naming yet, but I think about half of those are already
>packaged.
>> 
>> Thanks! I've just gone through to re-check them, renamed a few to the
>canonical
>> names for the relevant dev packages, leaving just three missing:
>> 
>>  lxd-build-deps : Depends: golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.v3-dev but it
>is not installable
>>   Depends: golang-gopkg-inconshreveable-log15.v2-dev
>but it is not installable
>
>From what I looked, this is a fork of
>golang-github-tendermint-log15-dev, which is the archive. There seem to
>be very few changes, so it might just work:
>https://github.com/inconshreveable/log15/compare/master...tendermint:master
>
>Not sure what the pkg-go team policy is on this kind of very similar
>packages, but I'm sure people actually in the team can answer. :)
>
>Cheers and thanks for working on this !
>
>-- 
>nodens

[Re-sent after subscribing to the pkg-go-maintainers list to comply with 
antispam measures]
-- 
Envoyé de mon téléphone Android avec K-9 Mail. Excusez la brièveté.

Bug#768073: [pkg-go] Bug#768073: LXC team take over ITP?

[Clément Hermann]

Le 14/10/2016 à 12:34, Jonathan Dowland a écrit :
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 02:11:13PM +0200, Martín Ferrari wrote:
>> A few of these dependencies are already in the archive, not all have the
>> standard naming yet, but I think about half of those are already packaged.
> 
> Thanks! I've just gone through to re-check them, renamed a few to the 
> canonical
> names for the relevant dev packages, leaving just three missing:
> 
>  lxd-build-deps : Depends: golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.v3-dev but it is not 
> installable
>   Depends: golang-gopkg-inconshreveable-log15.v2-dev but it 
> is not installable

From what I looked, this is a fork of
golang-github-tendermint-log15-dev, which is the archive. There seem to
be very few changes, so it might just work:
https://github.com/inconshreveable/log15/compare/master...tendermint:master

Not sure what the pkg-go team policy is on this kind of very similar
packages, but I'm sure people actually in the team can answer. :)

Cheers and thanks for working on this !

-- 
nodens



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#768073: [pkg-go] Bug#768073: LXC team take over ITP?

[Jonathan Dowland]

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 02:11:13PM +0200, Martín Ferrari wrote:
> A few of these dependencies are already in the archive, not all have the
> standard naming yet, but I think about half of those are already packaged.

Thanks! I've just gone through to re-check them, renamed a few to the canonical
names for the relevant dev packages, leaving just three missing:

 lxd-build-deps : Depends: golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.v3-dev but it is not 
installable
  Depends: golang-gopkg-inconshreveable-log15.v2-dev but it is 
not installable
  Depends: golang-gopkg-lxc-go-lxc.v2-dev but it is not 
installable

(I've pushed changes to debian/control just now)

I have a flosch package somewhere that I started last week, I'll try to dig
it out.

-- 
Jonathan Dowland


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#768073: [pkg-go] Bug#768073: LXC team take over ITP?

[Christopher Bachner]

Hello,

I have been using LXD for many months now, so I am patiently waiting for
the day when I will be able to use it on Debian! Thanks for all the work
y'all.

I was wondering what the plan is regarding the apparmor compatibility? I
think that LXD needs apparmor and as far as I know, apparmor is a kernel
thing and it needs to be baked into the kernel. Would there be an
alternative kernel for LXD in the repos then or how will this work?

Thanks!

Bug#768073: [pkg-go] Bug#768073: LXC team take over ITP?

[Martín Ferrari]

Hi Jon,

On 13/10/16 11:59, Jonathan Dowland wrote:

> Just a quick mail to say hello, I recently joined because I am interested

Welcomed! :)

> in packaging (at least) build dependencies for LXD, which is Canonical's
> container hypervisor platform.
> 
> The specific go dependencies that we need to package are:

A few of these dependencies are already in the archive, not all have the
standard naming yet, but I think about half of those are already packaged.

-- 
Martín Ferrari (Tincho)

Bug#768073: LXC team take over ITP?

[Jonathan Dowland]

Hi Team,

Just a quick mail to say hello, I recently joined because I am interested
in packaging (at least) build dependencies for LXD, which is Canonical's
container hypervisor platform.

The specific go dependencies that we need to package are:

* golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.v3-dev
* golang-gopkg-inconshreveable-log15.v2-dev
* golang-gopkg-lxc-go-lxc.v2-dev
* golang-any-shared-dev
* golang-go.crypto-dev
* golang-context-dev
* golang-github-gorilla-mux-dev
* golang-github-gosexy-gettext-dev
* golang-github-mattn-go-colorable-dev
* golang-github-mattn-go-sqlite3-dev
* golang-github-olekukonko-tablewriter-dev
* golang-github-pborman-uuid-dev
* golang-gocapability-dev
* golang-gopkg-tomb.v2-dev
* golang-yaml.v2-dev
* golang-websocket-dev

I'm looking at flosch-pongo2 right now, but I thought I'd post the list to this
mailing list just in case anyone else was interested in getting involved!

I've set up this wiki.d.o page to track progress on the above:
https://wiki.debian.org/LXD


Thanks,

-- 
Jonathan Dowland


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#768073: LXC team take over ITP?

[Adnan Hodzic]

Awesome!

Looking forward to any updates you may have in regards to golang-deps.

On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 11:37 PM, Jonathan Dowland  wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 08:17:09PM +0200, Adnan Hodzic wrote:
> > Jonathan and everybody else,
> >
> > Since I couldn't find my original LXD package source, I started from
> > scratch.
> >
> > I created new Git repo (pkg-lxc/lxd.git) and pushed initial Debian
> package
> > of LXD 2.4.1 (Yakkety release). Git repo is available on Alioth:
> > https://anonscm.debian.org/git/pkg-lxc/lxd.git
>
> Great, thanks!
>
> > Building the package will fail due to missing golang-* deps which ATM are
> > missing in Debian. I can't remember if the original list of missing
> > dependencies was this long, but this is what we we're currently dealing
> > with:
>
> I've updated the list at https://wiki.debian.org/LXD accordingly.
>
> > Has pkg-go team been notified of this problem? And are they willing to
> > package these for Debian?
>
> I have joined pkg-go and tackled one of the dependencies (with a second
> incoming) but I hadn't thought to msg the team with this list, I will do
> that too.
>
> Thanks!
>



-- 
Adnan

Bug#768073: LXC team take over ITP?

[Jonathan Dowland]

On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 08:17:09PM +0200, Adnan Hodzic wrote:
> Jonathan and everybody else,
> 
> Since I couldn't find my original LXD package source, I started from
> scratch.
> 
> I created new Git repo (pkg-lxc/lxd.git) and pushed initial Debian package
> of LXD 2.4.1 (Yakkety release). Git repo is available on Alioth:
> https://anonscm.debian.org/git/pkg-lxc/lxd.git

Great, thanks!

> Building the package will fail due to missing golang-* deps which ATM are
> missing in Debian. I can't remember if the original list of missing
> dependencies was this long, but this is what we we're currently dealing
> with:

I've updated the list at https://wiki.debian.org/LXD accordingly.
 
> Has pkg-go team been notified of this problem? And are they willing to
> package these for Debian?

I have joined pkg-go and tackled one of the dependencies (with a second
incoming) but I hadn't thought to msg the team with this list, I will do
that too.

Thanks!


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#768073: LXC team take over ITP?

[Adnan Hodzic]

Jonathan and everybody else,

Since I couldn't find my original LXD package source, I started from
scratch.

I created new Git repo (pkg-lxc/lxd.git) and pushed initial Debian package
of LXD 2.4.1 (Yakkety release). Git repo is available on Alioth:
https://anonscm.debian.org/git/pkg-lxc/lxd.git

Building the package will fail due to missing golang-* deps which ATM are
missing in Debian. I can't remember if the original list of missing
dependencies was this long, but this is what we we're currently dealing
with:

---

Unmet build dependencies: golang-any-shared-dev golang-go.crypto-dev
golang-context-dev golang-github-gorilla-mux-dev
golang-github-gosexy-gettext-dev golang-github-mattn-go-colorable-dev
golang-github-mattn-go-sqlite3-dev golang-github-olekukonko-tablewriter-dev
golang-github-pborman-uuid-dev golang-gocapability-dev
golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.v3-dev golang-gopkg-inconshreveable-log15.v2-dev
golang-gopkg-lxc-go-lxc.v2-dev golang-gopkg-tomb.v2-dev golang-petname-dev
golang-yaml.v2-dev golang-websocket-dev

---

Has pkg-go team been notified of this problem? And are they willing to
package these for Debian?

Let me know if you have any additional questions and/or comments.

On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 7:49 PM, Adnan Hodzic  wrote:

> Jonathan,
>
> >> Awhile back I started packaging process. I basically re-packaged the LXD
> >> Ubuntu package. As Evgeni mentioned it "is what we did with the other
> LXC
> >> components and that worked out pretty well so far."
> >
> >Do you have that lying around, and if so is it worth us pushing it to a
> git
> >repo for pkg-lxc?
>
> I think it is, as once golang dependencies are satisfied, we can push it
> into Debian.
>
> Let me look in what state I left it in, also I want to update it to the
> latest lxd version and I'll push into pkg-lxc git repo. If there are no
> objections?
>
> I'll do this this weekend.
>
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 6:13 PM, Jonathan Dowland  wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 12:35:24AM +0200, Adnan Hodzic wrote:
>> > Awhile back I started packaging process. I basically re-packaged the LXD
>> > Ubuntu package. As Evgeni mentioned it "is what we did with the other
>> LXC
>> > components and that worked out pretty well so far."
>>
>> Do you have that lying around, and if so is it worth us pushing it to a
>> git
>> repo for pkg-lxc?
>>
>> > At this point, I think we just need to align the efforts between pkg-go
>> and
>> > pkg-lxc teams, and we'll see LXD in Debian in no time.
>>
>> I've just joined both teams and opened an ITP for golang-petname. I've
>> got a
>> package prepared pending a few questions on the pkg-go list, I should get
>> it
>> into NEW Tomorrow. Then perhaps I can start on the others next week.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> --
>> Jonathan Dowland
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Adnan
>



-- 
Adnan

Bug#768073: LXC team take over ITP?

[Adnan Hodzic]

Jonathan,

>> Awhile back I started packaging process. I basically re-packaged the LXD
>> Ubuntu package. As Evgeni mentioned it "is what we did with the other LXC
>> components and that worked out pretty well so far."
>
>Do you have that lying around, and if so is it worth us pushing it to a git
>repo for pkg-lxc?

I think it is, as once golang dependencies are satisfied, we can push it
into Debian.

Let me look in what state I left it in, also I want to update it to the
latest lxd version and I'll push into pkg-lxc git repo. If there are no
objections?

I'll do this this weekend.

On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 6:13 PM, Jonathan Dowland  wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 12:35:24AM +0200, Adnan Hodzic wrote:
> > Awhile back I started packaging process. I basically re-packaged the LXD
> > Ubuntu package. As Evgeni mentioned it "is what we did with the other LXC
> > components and that worked out pretty well so far."
>
> Do you have that lying around, and if so is it worth us pushing it to a git
> repo for pkg-lxc?
>
> > At this point, I think we just need to align the efforts between pkg-go
> and
> > pkg-lxc teams, and we'll see LXD in Debian in no time.
>
> I've just joined both teams and opened an ITP for golang-petname. I've got
> a
> package prepared pending a few questions on the pkg-go list, I should get
> it
> into NEW Tomorrow. Then perhaps I can start on the others next week.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Jonathan Dowland
>



-- 
Adnan

Bug#768073: LXC team take over ITP?

[Jonathan Dowland]

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 12:35:24AM +0200, Adnan Hodzic wrote:
> Awhile back I started packaging process. I basically re-packaged the LXD
> Ubuntu package. As Evgeni mentioned it "is what we did with the other LXC
> components and that worked out pretty well so far."

Do you have that lying around, and if so is it worth us pushing it to a git
repo for pkg-lxc?

> At this point, I think we just need to align the efforts between pkg-go and
> pkg-lxc teams, and we'll see LXD in Debian in no time.

I've just joined both teams and opened an ITP for golang-petname. I've got a
package prepared pending a few questions on the pkg-go list, I should get it
into NEW Tomorrow. Then perhaps I can start on the others next week.


Thanks,

-- 
Jonathan Dowland


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#768073: LXC team take over ITP?

[Jonathan Dowland]

Hi folks, thanks for the useful replies!

I've sent requests to join pkg-lxc and pkg-go, and set up a scratch/todo page
on wiki.d.o at https://wiki.debian.org/LXD that we could use to coordinate work
needed.

Now to take a look at those Go packages...


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#768073: LXC team take over ITP?

[Adnan Hodzic]

Hey Jonathan (and everybody else),

Sorry about delayed reply.

> Adnan, how's it going?

Awhile back I started packaging process. I basically re-packaged the LXD
Ubuntu package. As Evgeni mentioned it "is what we did with the other LXC
components and that worked out pretty well so far."

However, with LXD, build would fail due to all the "golang-* dependencies
which are missing from Debian. I also planned on re-packaging these as
well, but I got sidetracked by things from "real life".

>There's a pkg-lxc team already. Since this package is/will be very
inter-related to
>LXC, perhaps it should be developed in that team? Team CCed. Are they
interested?
>Are you in pkg-lxc already?

I think Evgeni, gave a perfect answer for this one:

>Yes, Adnan is in pkg-lxc and technically the team is interested
>(given it falls into the same software stack) to have the whole stack
available in Debian.

...

>What's the state of the Ubuntu package? Could that make a good starting
point? How
>much hacking before that would be suitable for an experimental upload at
least?

Basically if we resolved the issue with missing golang-* dependencies, we
could probably have it uploaded within same day.

@Anthony and @Evgeni,

>> I took a quick look at the package source obtained via:
>>
>> dget -u http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/pool/main/l/lxd/lxd_2.2-
0ubuntu1.dsc
>>...
>> So, I guess the first step would be to package
>> golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.v3, golang-gopkg-inconshreveable-log15.v2,
>> golang-gopkg-lxc-go-lxc.v2 and golang-petname, or simply grab these
>> existing Ubuntu packages, make a few minor changes to debian/control
>> and debian/changelog, file ITPs to the Debian BTS, and finally upload
>> them to Debian.
>>
>> I do not see too many hurdles after that, at least I hope not.  ;-)
>
>IIRC that's similar to what Adnan told me the last time we talked about
LXD.

Yep, this is our only and main obstacle.

>> Also, should the Debian lxd be team-maintained by the pkg-lxc team or
>> the pkg-go team?  What do you think?
>
>Whatever works? :-)
>Stack-wise it's more pkg-lxc, language-wise pkg-go...
>I'd guess it will need coordination to both, LXC and other Go uploads at
times too.

I love this suggestion. If we could make this cooridnation happen, and both
teams do their part of the job that would be the perfect fusion.

I admit and acknowledge your frustration about this ITP being here for this
long. I think I explained why I stopped where I stopped, but I also admit
that I could've been more update to date with my communication.

If anyone wants to "hijack" this ITP from me, be my guest. Regardless, I
would still like to do the work that I claimed the responsibility for, and
get LXD into Debian.

At this point, I think we just need to align the efforts between pkg-go and
pkg-lxc teams, and we'll see LXD in Debian in no time.

Bug#768073: LXC team take over ITP?

[Thomas Goirand]

Jonathan,

By all means, please take over the ITP. We've been waiting for too long,
and it would be a big plus if we could have LXD for Stretch. If it was
there, I could working out a python-nova-lxd and nova-compute-lxd
package, which would be nice to see in Debian Stertch as well.

We've been waiting for too long. At this point, I'd say that the first
who uploads to the NEW queue wins.

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

Bug#768073: LXC team take over ITP?

[Jonathan Dowland]

Hi,

I think that an ITP that has been inactive this long could be taken over by
another interested party without it being a hijack, all things considered.
(I think some QA script might move it to RFP soon anyway).

Adnan, how's it going?

There's a pkg-lxc team already. Since this package is/will be very 
inter-related to
LXC, perhaps it should be developed in that team? Team CCed. Are they 
interested?
Are you in pkg-lxc already?

What's the state of the Ubuntu package? Could that make a good starting point? 
How
much hacking before that would be suitable for an experimental upload at least?

-- 
Jonathan Dowland


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature