Re: [pkg-go] DebConf18 - Anyone planning to go?

[Clément Hermann]

On 05/04/2018 23:22, Martín Ferrari wrote:
> On 05/04/18 15:31, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
>> I’ll not be able to attend in person.
>>
>> I’d be happy to review any material you come up with for the talk,
>> though :).
>>
>> In case there’ll be another BoF like last year, I’d like to participate
>> online as timezones permit.
> 
> Same from me, on the three items :)
> 
> 

I plan to attend, probably attending debcamp from the 24th of July.

No particular Go plan except polishing lxd packaging (which is more a
LXC team thing I guess) and participate to the BoF if there is one. I
think we should have one :)


Cheers,

-- 
nodens

___
Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers

Re: [pkg-go] [RFC] honoring DH_GOLANG_EXCLUDES for sources ?

[Clément Hermann]

Hi,

On 15/02/2018 13:26, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
> Thinking about this some more, I think I now agree with the rationale.
> 
> When building packages, we must honor DH_GOLANG_EXCLUDES, so it doesn’t
> make sense to have the source files in the package.
> 
> The next step is making sure that we can safely do this change without
> breaking anything.

Yes, and as I was saying in my first mail, it probably means having some
kind of switch to make it non-default at first, or use another variable.
That said, I intend to check how many packages use it: if it's only a
handful of them.
> Clément, would you be interested in sending a patch and doing the test?
> If not, can I suggest you file a bug for this issue, and I’ll pick it up
> when time permits. Thanks!
> 


I'll have a look, and file a bug if needed.

Cheers,

-- 
nodens

___
Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers

Re: [pkg-go] RFS: irtt/0.9-1 [ITP] (#888985)

[Clément Hermann]

On 07/02/2018 11:39, Pete Heist wrote:
> 
> Ah, ok. IRTT has an API, but it's not published yet. I think a
> binary-only package may be better at this point, and a separate source
> package later when that’s ready? If you agree, could you suggest a
> simple, current binary package hosted on github as a good example?

You can have a single upstream package and produce 2 binary packages -
it's a bit more complicated though. Hence the example of Debian Code Search.


> Debian Code Search? Though its compat version is 8. I just liked how the
> debian directory is hosted right in the github repo, which brings me to
> another question...
> 
> Is it possible to maintain everything on github, or does it need to be
> on alioth, and if so, what is a good workflow for when I want to pull in
> changes from upstream for a new release?

Usually you would host the packaging on Alioth (soon salsa.debian.org),
and leave the upstream on github. Debian Code Search is a bit different
since it's specific to Debian. That doesn't change the usefulness of the
example for binary/api separation though.

Regarding the workflow, the easiest is to tag your releases on github
(you probably already do it anyway) and merge the upstream remote in the
upstream branch on alioth/salsa every time you want to release (the tag
isn't mandatory, it's just easier, and allows for a debian/watch file).

[snip]

> 
> Hrm, any idea why I'm seeing large differences in lintian output? I
> didn’t see any warnings before I posted, but I do see new ones after the
> .lintianrc changes, just they look completely different...
> 
> $ cat /etc/debian_version 
> 9.3
> $ lintian --version
> Lintian v2.5.50.4
> $ cat .lintianrc 
> display-info = yes
> display-experimental = yes
> pedantic = yes
> show-overrides = no
> color = auto
> $ lintian ~/src/github.com/peteheist/irtt/dpkg/irtt_0.9-1_amd64.changes
> 
> P: irtt source: debian-watch-may-check-gpg-signature
> I: irtt: hardening-no-fortify-functions usr/bin/irtt
> I: irtt: spelling-error-in-binary usr/bin/irtt writeN written
> I: irtt: spelling-error-in-binary usr/bin/irtt ot to
> I: irtt: hardening-no-bindnow usr/bin/irtt
> I: irtt: hardening-no-pie usr/bin/irtt
> P: irtt: no-upstream-changelog
> 
> Also, some of the warnings (like compat-version) just come from output
> from dh-make-golang, which I just installed with ‘apt-get install
> dh-make-golang’. Do I need a newer version?

You're expected to run unstable (Sid) for packaging work. At least in a
virtual machine.

By the way, it's also a good practice to actually build the package in a
chroot (using git-buildpackage pbuilder options for instance), to avoid
build-depends issues.


Cheers,

-- 
nodens

___
Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers

Re: [pkg-go] [pkg-lxc-devel] Bug#768073: LXD packaging (and lxc-go plus a little bit of salsa)

[Clément Hermann]

Hi,


I've resumed active work on LXD, the last dependency
(golang-gopkg-lxc-go-lxc.v2 - #883488) is almost done (pending review
and upload).

Regarding lxc-go, I suggest we archive the previous attemps, since it
will live in pkg-go repository (using gitlab Archive feature on Salsa).
Same for the lxd ubuntu package that has been imported: I think it will
be much easier to create a new package from scratch using
dh-make-golang. Of course, I intent to cherry-pick bits of Ubuntu
packaging where it makes sense.

Speaking of Salsa, can someone grant me access to lxc-team ?

on LXD packaging per se, the only difference with other go packages will
probably be that pkg-go team switched to a workflow without pristine-tar
(see https://pkg-go.alioth.debian.org/workflow-changes.html if you're
interested). And, of course, that the repo is in lxc-team namespace.


Is there anything regarding lxc-team packaging style/workflow I should
be aware of? From what I saw, the workflow seems to be using gbp with
pristine star branch, UNRELEASED target distribution until the package
is ready to upload, so very similar to what I'm used to in pkg-perl.
Please correct me if I'm wrong! :)


Cheers.

-- 
nodens

___
Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers

[pkg-go] RFS: golang-gopkg-lxc-go-lxc.v2

[Clément Hermann]

Hi!


The last missing dependency for LXD should be ready to upload,
hopefully. If a DD could have a look at it and upload it that would be
awesome.

Martín, maybe preferably you since you already had a first look at it ?

Cheers!

-- 
nodens

___
Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers

[pkg-go] Fwd: Alioth → Salsa

[Clément Hermann]

Hi there,

during Perl Team last LHF session, I tried to put together a list of
what's here, and what's needed to move to Salsa.

While it is specific to the perl team, it should be a good starting
point for our own work I guess

Disclaimer: most of the useful input comes from Gregoa, credits should
go to him, I merely put everything together and added the knowledge I
had about current salsa status ;)


Cheers,

 Forwarded Message 
Subject: Alioth → Salsa
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 18:29:06 + (UTC)
Resent-From: debian-p...@lists.debian.org
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 19:28:44 +0100
From: gregor herrmann 
To: debian-p...@lists.debian.org

At yesterday's LHF meeting, we collected and sorted the status and
open points for the migration of our repos and surrounding helpers
from Alioth to Salsa. -- Thanks to nodens for the initiative and for
bringing this into some shape :)


* Alioth Services replacement status update
  * Mailing lists
- underway, should be ready before Alioth shutdown. Yay!
- alternatives: tracker.debian.org aliases
- Shall we ask for a l.d.o discussion list
(https://wiki.debian.org/Salsa/Doc#Import_mailing_list)?
  * IRC notification (KGB)
- formorer runs an irker instance (active on  #debian-mysql #alioth
  #debian-gnome #debian-ruby #debian-gis), see
  https://wiki.debian.org/Salsa/Doc#IRC_notifications
- formorer has written a ruby kgb-client (which only uses relay-message
  and connects to his own server):
https://salsa.debian.org/formorer/KGBClient
- Tincho works on implementing webhook support in kgb-server.
+ Status ?
- in all cases, needs to be set up on all projects
  * BTS Interaction
- A webhook exists (needs to be set up on all projects):

https://wiki.debian.org/Salsa/Doc#Dealing_with_Debian_BTS_from_commit_messages
  * E-mail notifications
- It's working: https://wiki.debian.org/Salsa/Doc#Email_notifications
  + using list address or dispa...@tracker.debian.org (do we use
that currently ?)
  + it needs to be enable on each project where we want it
  * PET:
- ask kanashiro/ansgar (or pet-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org)
- alternative:
https://udd.debian.org/dmd/?email1=pkg-perl-maintainers%40lists.alioth.debian.org
  + doesn't that rely on PET for the VCS info ?
  * Various other Hooks
- see migration below


* Migration to Salsa
  * Team name
- we need a team
  + name? '-team' will be appended
  * Accounts
- contact current project members? just the mailing list ?
  + each member needs to create their own account and ask to join
the team
- we probably need subteams/namespaces
  currently we have
  + meta.git
  + website.git
  + scripts.git
  + packages/
lib.*-perl.git
...
  + attic/
lib.*-perl.git
...
  + do we want to keep this structure? probably yes;
unless gitlab archiving (?) can replace attic/ ?
* project permissions? Is giving permission with the group on the
namespace   enough?
* repository migration
  - do we want to transfer all repos? probably yes. What about attic/ ?
+ there are scripts floating around
+ probably all without subteams (but we could maybe use a
non-subteam aware
  script for the packages/ namespace)
+ and not written in perl :)
+ after the final transfer: a pre-receive hook on alioth in all
repos
  with exit 1 and a helpful message
+ we might need a script which can replay the migration?
  - redirect map: https://salsa.debian.org/salsa/AliothRewriter
+ mass-commit Vcs-* changes? + do we really need that or
is the anonscm.d.o rewriter the long term   solution too?
 * repo management scripts:
   - setup-repository/remove-repository/rename-repository (in
meta.git)  probably have to be rewritten to work remotely with
the gitlab API
 + setup project
 + permissions
 + webhooks
 + libgitlab-api-v4-perl is packaged
 + we probably also need a "change repo properties later"
(like add/change hooks) script
  * .mrconfig (currently in meta.git)
- piggy-backs on pet data (used by split-json-info in meta.git,
also compare-hashes)
- updated by
setup-repository/remove-repository/rename-repository (in meta.git)
- future?
  * our website: website.git
- alexm has been working on an update with sphinx
- pages currently not yet enabled on salsa, should work with the
sphinx version?
- lots of references to alioth/moszumanska
  * packages to update:
   - dh-make-perl (or maybe not much - Vcs-*: ?)
   - pkg-perl-tools:
 * dpt-alioth-repo - needs to use gitlab API
 * dpt-alioth-author - probably obsolete
 * dpt-packagecheck - only maintainer, Vcs-*: ?
 * lintian checks - mostly docs
 * dpt-get-ubuntu-packages - 

Re: [pkg-go] [RFC] honoring DH_GOLANG_EXCLUDES for sources ?

[Clément Hermann]

Hi there,

Ping / reminder about this RFC - since I didn't get any feedback ;)

Cheers,

nodens

On 21/12/2017 21:05, Clément Hermann wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> I'm newly joined to the team, packaging some dependancies for LXD [0]
> mainly.
> 
> While working on golang-gopkg-lxc-go-lxc, Martin (Tincho) pointed to me
> that I should exclude examples from source - which surprised me, because
> I thought I did. But indeed, I misread the man page [1], which plainly
> states that this is about excluding _targets_.
> 
> OTOH, the example debian/rule extract is:
> 
>>
>> # We want to ship only the library packages themselves, not the accompanying
>> # example binaries.
>> export DH_GOLANG_EXCLUDES := examples/
> 
> 
> And in this case, we probably want to put the examples where they
> belong, that is, in the documentation, not in the source.
> So that mean we have to delete them from the source once they are copied.
> 
> What if we didn't copy them in the first place ?
> 
> I had a look at the code of dh-golang, and it wouldn't be difficult to
> use the same logic we have in the configure sub in install.
> 
> I actually started a branch to implement it.
> 
> 
> Now the issue is dealing with this change (if it's indeed a change, it
> could be an addition):
> 
> - we could just decide to honor the excludes in install, at least for
> sources and maybe bin. Then we have to deal with legacy, just in case,
> so it should be possible to trigger it off, and at some point in the
> future, we decide if it becomes the default or not.
> 
> - we could just add another variable for sources, and maybe also for
> bin. It looks counter-intuitive to me, but then it allows to deal with
> the case when you want to exclude something from source but not from
> target (regex problem, similar dir names in subdirs, etc).
> 
> What do you think ?
> 
> Cheers,
> 


___
Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers

Re: [pkg-go] Future address of Debian Go Packaging Team?

[Clément Hermann]

On 10/01/2018 03:41, Alexandre Viau wrote:
> On 08/01/18 08:24 PM, Julian Gilbey wrote:
>> However, the lists.alioth.debian.org list is due to be shut down in
>> three weeks' time (on 2018-02-01) as announced in
>> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2017/09/msg4.html
>> so what email address should I use instead?  And where is the Debian
>> Go Packaging Team page going to migrate to?
> 
> 
>> so what email address should I use instead?
> 
> Raphaël Hertzog has updated tracker.debian.org to support team email
> addresses. We can now send mails to team+@tracker.debian.org.
> The tracker system will also recognize the email in the maintainer field
> and automatically add the packages to the tracker.debian.org team.
> 
> In our case, our tracker email would be team+pkg...@tracker.debian.org.
> 
> For now, these mails will be discarded and you will have to rely on
> other tracker.debian.org features to receive updates about the packages
> but more features will be added.
> 

Note that there is still work ongoing to keep alioth lists alive longer
than alioth:

http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/alioth-staff-replacement/Week-of-Mon-20180101/000110.html

I would wait a bit more to see how things settle before starting to move
everything around, personnaly - we will still have a lot of packages to
modify anyway, a couple more or less isn't going to make such a
difference, and if we choose another route in the end it will mean
exceptions that will have to be handled. But YMMV :)

Cheers,

-- 
Clément  (nodens)

___
Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers

Re: [pkg-go] Bug#837500: fixed in golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.v3 3.0-1

[Clément Hermann]

Control: close 839748

On 28/12/2017 17:13, gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Dec 2017 16:00:17 +0000, Clément Hermann wrote:
> 
>> Format: 1.8
>> Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2017 19:33:18 +0100
>> Source: golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.v3
>> Binary: golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.v3-dev
>> Architecture: source all
>> Version: 3.0-1
>> Distribution: unstable
>> Urgency: medium
>> Maintainer: Debian Go Packaging Team 
>> <pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org>
>> Changed-By: Clément Hermann <nod...@nodens.org>
>> Description:
>>  golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.v3-dev - Django-syntax like template-engine for 
>> Go
>> Closes: 837500
>> Changes:
>>  golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.v3 (3.0-1) unstable; urgency=medium
>>  .
>>[ Jonathan Carter ]
>>* Initial upload to Debian (Closes: #837500)
> 
> Looks like this upload closed the wrong bug, 837500 instead of
> 839748.
Ooops... Sorry about that. I should have checked the changelog more
thoroughtly.

> 837500 can be closed as well, so the only "harm" currently is that 839748
> is still open.

Not anymore ;)

Thanks for noticing!


Cheers,


nodens

___
Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers

[pkg-go] [RFC] honoring DH_GOLANG_EXCLUDES for sources ?

[Clément Hermann]

Hi!

I'm newly joined to the team, packaging some dependancies for LXD [0]
mainly.

While working on golang-gopkg-lxc-go-lxc, Martin (Tincho) pointed to me
that I should exclude examples from source - which surprised me, because
I thought I did. But indeed, I misread the man page [1], which plainly
states that this is about excluding _targets_.

OTOH, the example debian/rule extract is:

> 
> # We want to ship only the library packages themselves, not the accompanying
> # example binaries.
> export DH_GOLANG_EXCLUDES := examples/


And in this case, we probably want to put the examples where they
belong, that is, in the documentation, not in the source.
So that mean we have to delete them from the source once they are copied.

What if we didn't copy them in the first place ?

I had a look at the code of dh-golang, and it wouldn't be difficult to
use the same logic we have in the configure sub in install.

I actually started a branch to implement it.


Now the issue is dealing with this change (if it's indeed a change, it
could be an addition):

- we could just decide to honor the excludes in install, at least for
sources and maybe bin. Then we have to deal with legacy, just in case,
so it should be possible to trigger it off, and at some point in the
future, we decide if it becomes the default or not.

- we could just add another variable for sources, and maybe also for
bin. It looks counter-intuitive to me, but then it allows to deal with
the case when you want to exclude something from source but not from
target (regex problem, similar dir names in subdirs, etc).

What do you think ?

Cheers,

-- 
nodens

[0] https://bugs.debian.org/768073
[1] Debian::Debhelper::Buildsystem::golang(3pm)

___
Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers

Re: [pkg-go] [pkg-lxc-devel] LXD packaging

[Clément Hermann]

On 17/12/2017 21:39, Clément Hermann wrote:

> On 04/12/2017 21:40, Clément Hermann wrote:
>> So, I did some work on golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2
>> <https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-go/packages/golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.git/>
>> (#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.

It's in NEW right now.

>> 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.
> 

I'm almost done, hopefully will have something ready for review this
weekend :)


>> 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.
> 

(Friendly) ping ?


Cheers,

\


___
Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers

Re: [pkg-go] [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
> <https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-go/packages/golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.git/>
> (#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

___
Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers

Re: [pkg-go] Bug#839748: ITP: golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.v3 -- Django-syntax like template-engine for Go

[Clément Hermann]

On 17/12/2017 16:40, Clément Hermann wrote:
> Hi !
> 
> On 03/12/2017 23:39, Clément Hermann wrote:
> 
>> I just uploaded my fixes and pushed the missing branches/tags.
>>
>> All it needs now is rewiewing, signed tag and upload, hopefully.
>>
> 
> I first did that, but discussion with Tincho and Jonathan on IRC made me
> reset the repo completely in a new repo:
> 
>  
> git+ssh://git.debian.org/git/pkg-go/packages/golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.v3.git
> 
> I created it with the setup-repository script on Alioth, hopefully I
> didn't mess up anything.


Note: I left /git/pkg-go/packages/golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.git in
place for now but I intend to delete it once the new package has been
reviewed. If someone thinks it's worth keeping, I suggest creating an
"attic" or "archive" directory. IIRC Tincho was against keeping it.

Cheers,

-- 
nodens

___
Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers

Re: [pkg-go] Bug#839748: ITP: golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.v3 -- Django-syntax like template-engine for Go

[Clément Hermann]

Hi !

On 03/12/2017 23:39, Clément Hermann wrote:

> I just uploaded my fixes and pushed the missing branches/tags.
> 
> All it needs now is rewiewing, signed tag and upload, hopefully.
> 

I first did that, but discussion with Tincho and Jonathan on IRC made me
reset the repo completely in a new repo:

 git+ssh://git.debian.org/git/pkg-go/packages/golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.v3.git

I created it with the setup-repository script on Alioth, hopefully I
didn't mess up anything.

The reasoning behind the reset is that:
- starting from the Ubuntu package made it harder (more work) to follow
the pkg-go rules, especially the new workflow [1]
- some work from the orginal packaging didn't make sense since this
package is solely meant as a build-dep for lxd (so far), so no need to
take a snapshot for instance: LXD is happy with the v3 release
- It was better to start from scratch with dh-make-golang and get bits
from the original packaging work, in the end.

So now, it's ready. If someone could review and upload it, that would be
great :)

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

Cheers,

-- 
nodens

___
Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers

Re: [pkg-go] 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
<clement.herm...@virtua.ch> 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
<https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-go/packages/golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.git/>
(#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


___
Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers

[pkg-go] Bug#883488: ITP: golang-gopkg-lxc-go-lxc.v2 -- Go bindings for liblxc

[Clément Hermann]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: =?utf-8?q?Cl=C3=A9ment_Hermann?= 


* Package name: golang-gopkg-lxc-go-lxc.v2
  Version : 0.0~git20171109.99ba61b-1
  Upstream Author : LXC - Linux Containers
* URL : https://github.com/lxc/go-lxc
* License : LGPL-2.1 with redistribution exception
  Programming Lang: Go
  Description : Go bindings for liblxc

 go-lxc implements Go bindings for the LXC C API (liblxc).


This package is a dependancy for LXD. It will be maintained under
pkg-go team umbrella.

___
Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers

Re: [pkg-go] ITP: golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.v3 -- Django-syntax like template-engine for Go

[Clément Hermann]

On 21/11/2017 12:48, Clément Hermann wrote:

> On Sun, 19 Nov 2017 18:45:21 +0100 <clement.herm...@virtua.ch> wrote:
>> Hi !
>>
>> On Tue, 4 Oct 2016 15:30:00 +0100 Jonathan Dowland <j...@debian.org>
> wrote:
> 
>>> This is a dependency for LXD and is being packaged via the pkg-go team.
>>
>> It's actually the last one beside golang-gopkg-lxc-go-lxc.v2-dev.
>>
>> Any ETA ? I saw the repository under pkg-go, is there any way I can help ?
> 
> When I wanted to build the package, I realized it's not using
> git-buildpackage, as the other Go packages do.
> 
> Is it intentional, or do you plan to use graft or something like that to
> rewrite history and have the proper branches ? I had a look at it, and
> I'm not really comfortable enough with git
> to do it without messing things up, so I wonder what the options are.

So, looking at it more closely, I found out that the initial commit is
actually the upstream source, which means we can just branch from it for
the upstream branch.

While waiting for the workflow changes following DebConf17 BoF [0], I
guess the best is to be as standard as possible, even if it's a bit
painful in this case, since uscan doesn't allow arbitrary snapshots yet
[1] and upstream stopped doing releases ages ago. So I guess manual
snapshot and pristine-tar is the way to go.

Of course if you have upstream and pristine-tar branch locally it would
be great to push them ;)


I asked to join the pkg-go project on alioth, because I have a couple
commits ready locally for trivial nitpick, but I guess this package is
not far from upload, and I'm preparing an ITP for
golang-gopkg-lxc-go-lxc.v2-dev.

Would anyone mind rewieving / uploading ? Jonathan, are you still
working on this, or should I take over the ITP ?


Cheers,

nodens


[0] https://pkg-go.alioth.debian.org/workflow-changes.html
[1] https://bugs.debian.org/811565

___
Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers

Re: [pkg-go] ITP: golang-gopkg-flosch-pongo2.v3 -- Django-syntax like template-engine for Go

[Clément Hermann]

[wrong CC address... Sorry, need more sleep !]


On Sun, 19 Nov 2017 18:45:21 +0100  wrote:
> Hi !
>
> On Tue, 4 Oct 2016 15:30:00 +0100 Jonathan Dowland 
wrote:

> > This is a dependency for LXD and is being packaged via the pkg-go team.
>
> It's actually the last one beside golang-gopkg-lxc-go-lxc.v2-dev.
>
> Any ETA ? I saw the repository under pkg-go, is there any way I can help ?

When I wanted to build the package, I realized it's not using
git-buildpackage, as the other Go packages do.

Is it intentional, or do you plan to use graft or something like that to
rewrite history and have the proper branches ? I had a look at it, and
I'm not really comfortable enough with git
to do it without messing things up, so I wonder what the options are.


Cheers,

-- 
nodens


___
Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers

[pkg-go] Bug#879522: golang-github-tendermint-log15-dev: github.com/tendermint/log15 marked as deprecated upstream

[Clément Hermann]

Package: golang-github-tendermint-log15-dev
Severity: wishlist

Hi,

while looking into LXD dependancies packaging (see #768073), I noticed
that:
- the upstream code of golang-github-tendermint-log15-dev is a fork of
  github.com/inconshreveable/log15 (we need this for lxd, and I'm about
  to use almost exactly the same description etc) - maybe it should be
  mentioned in the description to explain 2 very similar packages?
- this package seems to be here solely as a dependancy for abci, but
  it's marked as deprecated upstream: the recent versions of abci don't
  actually need it. So maybe it would be best to update abci an just
  remove this one.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: buster/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 4.13.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=fr_FR.utf8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8), 
LANGUAGE=fr_FR.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)

Versions of packages golang-github-tendermint-log15-dev depends on:
pn  golang-github-go-stack-stack-dev  
pn  golang-github-mattn-go-colorable-dev  
ii  golang-go 2:1.9~1

golang-github-tendermint-log15-dev recommends no packages.

golang-github-tendermint-log15-dev suggests no packages.

___
Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers

Re: [pkg-go] [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 <evg...@debian.org> 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,
> 


___
Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers

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

[Clément Hermann]

Le 14 octobre 2016 13:33:53 GMT+02:00, "Clément Hermann" <nod...@nodens.org> 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.___
Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-go-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers