[Pkg-javascript-devel] Processed: Re: Bug#644767: Update
Processing control commands: block -1 by 685834 Bug #644767 [wnpp] ITP: tilemill -- map design studio 644767 was blocked by: 629445 644767 was not blocking any bugs. Added blocking bug(s) of 644767: 685834 -- 644767: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=644767 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#740893: libjs-jquery-hotkeys regression (was: python-coverage regression)
Hi, On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.auwrote: Isn't the problem best fixed by reverting the 'libjs-jquery-hotkeys' package to the working 0.8 version? The newer version breaks dependent packages, so the right place to apply pressure it seems to me is by rejecting that newer code from Debian until it works again. I'm not sure what the best solution is. I've identified the last revision of that package that worked well with coverage.py. One option is to revert the debian package, but presumably those changes were made for a reason, and I'd hate to break other projects. Another option is to use the vendorised libraries in upstart coverage.py. Sure. It's easy for me to identify the location for a solution in a package which I'm not really involved with, so my position is not the only one to consider. Please let me know if I can do anything to help out. Have you got any feedback from the Debian package maintainer of 'libjs-jquery-hotkeys' to find out whether rolling back to version 0.8 is feasible? As far as I can tell, the maintainer is listed as ' pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org', and I assume they're getting these bug emails, but I've not had any response yet. Have you worked with that package maintainer to report the bug upstream (it is the package maintainer's responsibility)? Has the upstream developer You cut out here, but I get the gist. There's a few complications. As far as I can make out, the problem was not introduced upstream, but rather in Debian's version of the library. The upstream code ( https://github.com/tzuryby/jquery.hotkeys) does not contain the problematic code. WRT reverting the changes made to the library, that solution would suit me fine, but I have no idea whether this will break other people (not being a JS developer, this is kind of hard for me to determine). Cheers, -- Thomi Richards thomi.richa...@canonical.com ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#685834: NMU under way for modestmaps-js
So it turns out there is an updated package in the git repo. I'll review this and NMU to DELAYED/10 if no one else takes care of this. A. -- It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education - Albert Einstein signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#685834: Bug#685834: NMU under way for modestmaps-js
Hi, yes, go ahead, i had that goal to package tilemill too, but died in the way under an avalanche of other things to package. I'll surely resume some work next month, unless somebody does it before. Jérémy. Le dimanche 30 mars 2014 à 16:58 -0400, anar...@debian.org a écrit : So it turns out there is an updated package in the git repo. I'll review this and NMU to DELAYED/10 if no one else takes care of this. A. ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Processing of modestmaps-js_3.3.6+ds1-1.1_amd64.changes
modestmaps-js_3.3.6+ds1-1.1_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: modestmaps-js_3.3.6+ds1-1.1.dsc modestmaps-js_3.3.6+ds1.orig.tar.gz modestmaps-js_3.3.6+ds1-1.1.debian.tar.xz libjs-modestmaps_3.3.6+ds1-1.1_all.deb node-modestmaps_3.3.6+ds1-1.1_all.deb modestmaps-js-doc_3.3.6+ds1-1.1_all.deb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon (running on host franck.debian.org) ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Please upload jquery-coolfieldset
Dear javascript maintainers, I again ask for uploading this simple package which have been reviewed a lot... Le 29/03/2014 00:12, François-Régis a écrit : will you dare have look at my package jquery-coolfieldset [1] and upload it. It as been reviewd by Marcello, Emilien and Roland and every remarks have been treated. The final last change was (following Roland review) to remove useless dh_install_overide wich was a left ovrt of oldstuff. So as this very little piece of software is a dependency of fusionforge, could anyone upload it ? [1] http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-javascript/jquery-coolfieldset.git Tell me if it's better to ask on debian mentors. Regards, -- François-Régis ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Processed: Re: Bug#644767: Update
Processing control commands: block -1 by 725362 Bug #644767 [wnpp] ITP: tilemill -- map design studio 644767 was blocked by: 685834 629445 644767 was not blocking any bugs. Added blocking bug(s) of 644767: 725362 -- 644767: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=644767 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] JavaScript policy?
François-Régis f...@miradou.com writes: As initiator of the thread, I may recall that the question we ask is Should we remove from source tarball minified versions of source files existing in tarball. An outcome of the thread is to show that the original question is ill-posed, because it hides some important assumptions. Those assumptions are now evident, and important questions come from them: * How do we know – and demonstrate to anyone who asks – the truth of the assertion that the source is actually the corresponding source of the exact non-source file? My answer to this is: Currently, we don't know that at all. We take upstream's word for it, though upstream frequently has no incentive to guarantee that to us and can easily make mistakes in ensuring it. * How do we maximise the certainty that what we ship in the source package has no files without corresponding source? My answer to this is: 100% certainty can be achieved by automatically omitting the non-source files from the Debian source package. * How do we maximise the certainty that what we ship in *every future version* of the source package has no files without corresponding source? My answer to this is: Again, 100% certainty can be achieved by automatically omitting the non-source files every time from every Debian release of the source package. * The Debian Social Contract obliges us to provide corresponding source for every file in Debian. Should we rate the promise so unimportant that we risk shipping a file without corresponding source? My answer to this is: No, we should do what we can to meet that obligation, and guarantee it to our recipients in a manner that they can independently verify. Whatever your answers to these questions are, I hope you can understand that they are necessary to provide context to the question you would like answered. -- \ “Let others praise ancient times; I am glad I was born in | `\ these.” —Ovid (43 BCE–18 CE) | _o__) | Ben Finney ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#743148: borken symlink
Package: node-tilelive-mapnik Version: 0.6.1-1 Severity: grave This package is basically unusable. While trying to package tilemill, I was trying to load this library, and got this: Error: Cannot find module 'tilelive-mapnik' The reason for this is this broken symlink: anarcat@marcos:tilemill*$ ls -al /usr/lib/nodejs/tilelive-mapnik/ total 40K drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 mars 30 17:44 . drwxr-xr-x 51 root root 4096 mars 30 17:44 .. lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 9 sept. 18 2013 index.js - mapnik.js -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2289 sept. 2 2013 lockingcache.js -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12798 sept. 18 2013 mapnik_backend.js -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 8434 sept. 18 2013 render.js A. -- System Information: Debian Release: jessie/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 3.12-1-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=fr_FR.utf8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Versions of packages node-tilelive-mapnik depends on: ii node-generic-pool 2.0.3-1 ii node-mapnik 1.2.3-1 ii node-mime 1.2.11-1 ii node-sphericalmercator 1.0.1-2 ii node-step 0.0.5+20111229-1 ii node-underscore 1.4.4-2 ii nodejs 0.10.26~dfsg1-1 node-tilelive-mapnik recommends no packages. node-tilelive-mapnik suggests no packages. -- no debconf information ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#743148: Bug#743148: borken symlink
Le dimanche 30 mars 2014 à 18:46 -0400, Antoine Beaupré a écrit : Package: node-tilelive-mapnik Version: 0.6.1-1 Severity: grave This package is basically unusable. While trying to package tilemill, I was trying to load this library, and got this: Fixing it ! Jérémy. ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Processed: severity of 742347 is grave
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: severity 742347 grave Bug #742347 [node-jsdom] node-jsdom: require(jsdom) does not work in nodejs: missing cssstyle module Severity set to 'grave' from 'normal' thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 742347: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=742347 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Processed: block 644767 with 743148
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: block 644767 with 743148 Bug #644767 [wnpp] ITP: tilemill -- map design studio 644767 was blocked by: 742347 725362 685834 629445 644767 was not blocking any bugs. Added blocking bug(s) of 644767: 743148 thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 644767: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=644767 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Processing of node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1_amd64.changes
node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1.dsc node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8.orig.tar.gz node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1.debian.tar.gz node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1_all.deb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon (running on host franck.debian.org) ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#743151: two more missing modules (htmlparser2 and nwmatcher)
Package: node-jsdom Version: 0.8.10+dfsg1-1 Severity: grave In addition to cssstyle (#742347), there are two more modules missing for this nodejs module to work: nwmatcher and htmlparser2. The latter is especially fun: htmlparser2@3.7.1 /usr/lib/node_modules/htmlparser2 +-- domelementtype@1.1.1 +-- domutils@1.4.1 +-- entities@1.0.0 +-- domhandler@2.2.0 +-- readable-stream@1.1.12 (isarray@0.0.1, inherits@2.0.1, string_decoder@0.10.25-1, core-util-is@1.0.1) Workaround, again: sudo npm --prefix /usr -g install nwmatcher htmlparser2 A. -- System Information: Debian Release: jessie/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 3.12-1-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=fr_FR.utf8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Versions of packages node-jsdom depends on: ii node-contextify 0.1.6-1 ii node-cssom 0.3.0-1 ii node-htmlparser 1.7.5+ds1-1 ii node-request 2.26.1-1 ii nodejs 0.10.26~dfsg1-1 node-jsdom recommends no packages. node-jsdom suggests no packages. -- no debconf information ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Processed: limit source to node-tilelive-mapnik, tagging 743148
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: #node-tilelive-mapnik (0.6.8-1) unstable; urgency=medium # # * Replace broken index.js link by package.json (Closes: #743148). # limit source node-tilelive-mapnik Limiting to bugs with field 'source' containing at least one of 'node-tilelive-mapnik' Limit currently set to 'source':'node-tilelive-mapnik' tags 743148 + pending Bug #743148 [node-tilelive-mapnik] borken symlink Added tag(s) pending. thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 743148: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=743148 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#743148: Bug#743148: borken symlink
On 2014-03-30 18:59:19, Jérémy Lal wrote: Le dimanche 30 mars 2014 à 18:46 -0400, Antoine Beaupré a écrit : Package: node-tilelive-mapnik Version: 0.6.1-1 Severity: grave This package is basically unusable. While trying to package tilemill, I was trying to load this library, and got this: Fixing it ! I found that the symlink should be pointing to mapnik_backend.js. A. -- Five out of four people have a problem with fractions pgpr2i2Jer9wP.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable
Accepted: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 01:07:16 +0200 Source: node-tilelive-mapnik Binary: node-tilelive-mapnik Architecture: source all Version: 0.6.8-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Debian Javascript Maintainers pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org Changed-By: Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org Description: node-tilelive-mapnik - Tilelive store for mapnik datasources rendering - Node.js module Closes: 743148 Changes: node-tilelive-mapnik (0.6.8-1) unstable; urgency=medium . * New upstream version * Replace broken index.js link by package.json (Closes: #743148). * Standards-Version 3.9.5 Checksums-Sha1: 8e06be813918d83d1f533ddffb4163e75dd3996b 2095 node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1.dsc c81c5402108dd8e3a915d5b8740fa0ae09b8bd48 1293236 node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8.orig.tar.gz c62878f1380ea42610a7358b950182789f6b7e7b 9471 node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1.debian.tar.gz 65ebe73212ad23475cc543c5d7d22a8ccc63c4c3 19732 node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1_all.deb Checksums-Sha256: ecf2cccdd750752fbdab71811e85b4be844438120bc7ee915cef3ada27206507 2095 node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1.dsc 9335876354e0b46e2279fd0de3edee81d278ebb999f7f51e732c499b27391947 1293236 node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8.orig.tar.gz fa448d51347fcc88253222c36eb8c3de830137c7f8d2ffa44581ebed74f13615 9471 node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1.debian.tar.gz 96453ce02f271606b4b270e6b109dfa5b333ba64d9bb2cf151c6509496ef7123 19732 node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1_all.deb Files: 03f3e964c43c96b9da1d1b6df8544ba1 2095 web extra node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1.dsc 7a40da4038d85c6820242b85ace15a73 1293236 web extra node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8.orig.tar.gz fdf150bfad3c0e7cecd836b6ab6cecc5 9471 web extra node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1.debian.tar.gz e8a553084a86a91073e14b4dfb3bb98b 19732 web extra node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1_all.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJTOKTiAAoJEGYRwF7dOfN06UAQAI9pIXYcn+CorIof1lfyfsVh zeaNuRl/FhiGq1PnmGCdQN94t7cJKVSF5JuswzwNTlEhm+5KO+uFgtKR+bWYTqBH E9640r+5MiwiQuZhFXYqCJjk9WvPAQD8OJD6WpDa3ONN0A3e86uxD410XUkFKkDG rsHeN80NuQq/kI+L4Oqp12Ian5odCT5Qn8Kr09n90SZf0MwHlZn/PuoVTjPdMB1S gVxY5371+bjobjuz8HFZy3UwGl9UxY/KzY6CY5P3KmK3eTMGbxZk9XOP2l7k70P8 iYzlt3ZzbEOavNmibs/dAE0NYmp2bdlZCkYC2k0e8HtBDwPLDE7uoZiL1TibbwvV n0KjsD8iyiU2WRKTwaneNpUXdrxj+FEQX9msCsIr1W6GSonpmapqD1sdnn5nsICt Nwua2OtOb+ggQSoCReT1OaSm9wlVbSScAqYW6/smcYRHrOljecpGBaUWYOCYWS7D SG5DXinWpDy63Q4C5cHA0eQLntlXJbr262OLfeHI71+kDu5+13rp2fcKXL4NMyZa s/3jO6NJAzjIGXZDkJnETyxcp4S2DjftU594GKl51+U6h2Zt9rCrkcPdF/bj2QJs ux7XzidbUzKQ/PCgeuH55jg0gzDyNqe/7T4F5TX7Mq7aPqKDrlZpEr2pM4M2VHgI DsSnqYVpz5oiczF+2QXB =tVaf -END PGP SIGNATURE- Thank you for your contribution to Debian. ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#743148: marked as done (borken symlink)
Your message dated Sun, 30 Mar 2014 23:18:26 + with message-id e1wuozi-0008mi...@franck.debian.org and subject line Bug#743148: fixed in node-tilelive-mapnik 0.6.8-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #743148, regarding borken symlink to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 743148: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=743148 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: node-tilelive-mapnik Version: 0.6.1-1 Severity: grave This package is basically unusable. While trying to package tilemill, I was trying to load this library, and got this: Error: Cannot find module 'tilelive-mapnik' The reason for this is this broken symlink: anarcat@marcos:tilemill*$ ls -al /usr/lib/nodejs/tilelive-mapnik/ total 40K drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 mars 30 17:44 . drwxr-xr-x 51 root root 4096 mars 30 17:44 .. lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 9 sept. 18 2013 index.js - mapnik.js -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2289 sept. 2 2013 lockingcache.js -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 12798 sept. 18 2013 mapnik_backend.js -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 8434 sept. 18 2013 render.js A. -- System Information: Debian Release: jessie/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 3.12-1-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=fr_FR.utf8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Versions of packages node-tilelive-mapnik depends on: ii node-generic-pool 2.0.3-1 ii node-mapnik 1.2.3-1 ii node-mime 1.2.11-1 ii node-sphericalmercator 1.0.1-2 ii node-step 0.0.5+20111229-1 ii node-underscore 1.4.4-2 ii nodejs 0.10.26~dfsg1-1 node-tilelive-mapnik recommends no packages. node-tilelive-mapnik suggests no packages. -- no debconf information ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- Source: node-tilelive-mapnik Source-Version: 0.6.8-1 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of node-tilelive-mapnik, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive. A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is attached. Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you have further comments please address them to 743...@bugs.debian.org, and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate. Debian distribution maintenance software pp. Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org (supplier of updated node-tilelive-mapnik package) (This message was generated automatically at their request; if you believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org) -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 01:07:16 +0200 Source: node-tilelive-mapnik Binary: node-tilelive-mapnik Architecture: source all Version: 0.6.8-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Debian Javascript Maintainers pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org Changed-By: Jérémy Lal kapo...@melix.org Description: node-tilelive-mapnik - Tilelive store for mapnik datasources rendering - Node.js module Closes: 743148 Changes: node-tilelive-mapnik (0.6.8-1) unstable; urgency=medium . * New upstream version * Replace broken index.js link by package.json (Closes: #743148). * Standards-Version 3.9.5 Checksums-Sha1: 8e06be813918d83d1f533ddffb4163e75dd3996b 2095 node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1.dsc c81c5402108dd8e3a915d5b8740fa0ae09b8bd48 1293236 node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8.orig.tar.gz c62878f1380ea42610a7358b950182789f6b7e7b 9471 node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1.debian.tar.gz 65ebe73212ad23475cc543c5d7d22a8ccc63c4c3 19732 node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1_all.deb Checksums-Sha256: ecf2cccdd750752fbdab71811e85b4be844438120bc7ee915cef3ada27206507 2095 node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1.dsc 9335876354e0b46e2279fd0de3edee81d278ebb999f7f51e732c499b27391947 1293236 node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8.orig.tar.gz fa448d51347fcc88253222c36eb8c3de830137c7f8d2ffa44581ebed74f13615 9471 node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1.debian.tar.gz 96453ce02f271606b4b270e6b109dfa5b333ba64d9bb2cf151c6509496ef7123 19732 node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1_all.deb Files: 03f3e964c43c96b9da1d1b6df8544ba1 2095 web extra node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1.dsc 7a40da4038d85c6820242b85ace15a73 1293236 web extra node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8.orig.tar.gz fdf150bfad3c0e7cecd836b6ab6cecc5 9471 web extra node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1.debian.tar.gz e8a553084a86a91073e14b4dfb3bb98b 19732 web extra node-tilelive-mapnik_0.6.8-1_all.deb -BEGIN PGP
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#743152: doesn't ship the version required for tilemill
Package: node-bones Version: 2.0.1+ds1-4 Severity: normal As part of the gargantuan effort to ship tilemill in Debian, I am struggling with this package, which was, I assume, uploaded exactly for tilemill (because it has no other reverse dependencies). It turns out that tilemill depends explicitely on version 1.3.27, while Debian ships the 2.0 release, which is actually *older* that the 1.3 series: https://github.com/developmentseed/bones/releases I have seen this strangeness before, in fact in tilemill itself: https://github.com/mapbox/tilemill/issues/2258 So I am not sure how to deal with this. Maybe a removal from unstable and a new upload of 1.3 would avoid an epoch change... Thanks for looking into this. A. -- System Information: Debian Release: jessie/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 3.12-1-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=fr_FR.utf8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Versions of packages node-bones depends on: ii node-backbone0.9.2-4 ii node-express 2.5.9-2 ii node-jquery 1.6.3-1 ii node-mirror 0.3.3-3 ii node-optimist0.3.5-1 ii node-underscore 1.4.4-2 ii nodejs 0.10.26~dfsg1-1 node-bones recommends no packages. node-bones suggests no packages. -- no debconf information ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#743151: Bug#743151: two more missing modules (htmlparser2 and nwmatcher)
Le dimanche 30 mars 2014 à 19:04 -0400, Antoine Beaupré a écrit : Package: node-jsdom Version: 0.8.10+dfsg1-1 Severity: grave In addition to cssstyle (#742347), there are two more modules missing for this nodejs module to work: nwmatcher and htmlparser2. The latter is especially fun: htmlparser2@3.7.1 /usr/lib/node_modules/htmlparser2 +-- domelementtype@1.1.1 +-- domutils@1.4.1 +-- entities@1.0.0 +-- domhandler@2.2.0 +-- readable-stream@1.1.12 (isarray@0.0.1, inherits@2.0.1, string_decoder@0.10.25-1, core-util-is@1.0.1) oooh i like that (nah i'm a heavy jsdom user) taking care of it :) Jérémy ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] JavaScript policy?
Hi Ben, Le 31/03/2014 00:03, Ben Finney a écrit : François-Régis f...@miradou.com writes: As initiator of the thread, I may recall that the question we ask is Should we remove from source tarball minified versions of source files existing in tarball. An outcome of the thread is to show that the original question is ill-posed, because it hides some important assumptions. Those assumptions are now evident, and important questions come from them: Thank you for the ill-posed, if you've read the thread, you can see that my first proposal was to remove any minified file from any original tarball. This does'nt meet a consensus. * How do we know – and demonstrate to anyone who asks – the truth of the assertion that the source is actually the corresponding source of the exact non-source file? Before asking how do we know, we should ask do we need to know (and this in fact the question of the thread). To extend this, we provide lots of picture files and good practice is to have a so called source file (xcf, svg or whatever) but noboby can guarantee that the bitmap file (png, tiff, jpeg ...) is actually sourced by coresponding source file. Do we have to remove them from arig tarball ? My answer to this is: Currently, we don't know that at all. We take upstream's word for it, though upstream frequently has no incentive to guarantee that to us and can easily make mistakes in ensuring it. You're right so we take care to which is pristine upstream and which is provided in binary package. And people using debian source packages outside debian should take care of it, but can check that upsream tarball is the same as debian tarball. * How do we maximise the certainty that what we ship in the source package has no files without corresponding source? My answer to this is: 100% certainty can be achieved by automatically omitting the non-source files from the Debian source package. Once again you maximize one thing but this could minify other things, like having a pristine upstream tarball. This is the debate. * How do we maximise the certainty that what we ship in *every future version* of the source package has no files without corresponding source? My answer to this is: Again, 100% certainty can be achieved by automatically omitting the non-source files every time from every Debian release of the source package. I don't see any difference from you previous arguments. * The Debian Social Contract obliges us to provide corresponding source for every file in Debian. Should we rate the promise so unimportant that we risk shipping a file without corresponding source? My answer to this is: No, we should do what we can to meet that obligation, and guarantee it to our recipients in a manner that they can independently verify. The question here is to accept minified versions of files that have sources in orig tarball, Whatever your answers to these questions are, I hope you can understand that they are necessary to provide context to the question you would like answered. I just try to have responses to the question I've adressed Should we remove from source tarball minified versions of source files existing in tarball. The response may depends on context but please deatails which kind of contest. Cheers, -- François-Régis ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Processed: block 644767 with 742347 743151 685834 743148 743152 725362 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: block 644767 with 742347 743151 685834 743148 743152 725362 Bug #644767 [wnpp] ITP: tilemill -- map design studio 644767 was blocked by: 742347 725362 743148 629445 685834 644767 was not blocking any bugs. Added blocking bug(s) of 644767: 743151 and 743152 retitle 743152 nodes-bones doesn't ship the version required for tilemill Bug #743152 [node-bones] doesn't ship the version required for tilemill Changed Bug title to 'nodes-bones doesn't ship the version required for tilemill' from 'doesn't ship the version required for tilemill' retitle 743151 node-jsdom: two more missing modules (htmlparser2 and nwmatcher) Bug #743151 [node-jsdom] two more missing modules (htmlparser2 and nwmatcher) Changed Bug title to 'node-jsdom: two more missing modules (htmlparser2 and nwmatcher)' from 'two more missing modules (htmlparser2 and nwmatcher)' thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 644767: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=644767 743151: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=743151 743152: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=743152 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#743152: Bug#743152: doesn't ship the version required for tilemill
Quoting Antoine Beaupré (2014-03-31 01:21:56) It turns out that tilemill depends explicitely on version 1.3.27, while Debian ships the 2.0 release, which is actually *older* that the 1.3 series: https://github.com/developmentseed/bones/releases I have seen this strangeness before, in fact in tilemill itself: https://github.com/mapbox/tilemill/issues/2258 So I am not sure how to deal with this. Maybe a removal from unstable and a new upload of 1.3 would avoid an epoch change... Nope - you would need to remove it from *all* users' systems too. This is exactly the situation you want to use an epoch. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: signature ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] JavaScript policy?
François-Régis f...@miradou.com writes: Hi Ben, Le 31/03/2014 00:03, Ben Finney a écrit : * How do we know – and demonstrate to anyone who asks – the truth of the assertion that the source is actually the corresponding source of the exact non-source file? Before asking how do we know, we should ask do we need to know (and this in fact the question of the thread). You're asserting that there is some set of works received from upstream where: * (for example) ‘foo.js’ and ‘foo.min.js’ are distributed together; and * the Debian maintainer claims ‘foo.js’ in the source package is the corresponding source for ‘foo.min.js’ in the source package, thereby satisfying the Social Contract requirement to provide the source for every work in Debian. Yes? (If you're not claiming there is such a set of works, then I don't see the point of discussing what to do about them. So I'll continue on the assumption that you claim there really *are* some such works to which the discussion applies.) In order for the Debian package maintainer to claim that file ‘foo.js’ is the corresponding source for the non-source file ‘foo.min.js’, we should require that the claim is true about those specific files. That seems to make it clear that the question quoted above – “how do we know?” – is prior to the question you're posing – “based on that knowledge, what should we do?”. Or are you saying that it's acceptable for a Debian package maintainer to make a claim about the freedoms of the source package's recipient, without a sound reason for claiming it? My answer to this is: Currently, we don't know that at all. We take upstream's word for it, though upstream frequently has no incentive to guarantee that to us and can easily make mistakes in ensuring it. You're right so we take care to which is pristine upstream and which is provided in binary package. And people using debian source packages outside debian should take care of it, but can check that upsream tarball is the same as debian tarball. That's an entirely separate question: whether what Debian provides is the same file as provided by upstream. That question is not at issue. What is at issue is whether *what upstream provides* is actually corresponding source for a non-source file. Whether, for example, the file ‘foo.js’ is the corresponding source for ‘foo.min.js’. The fact that upstream provided both of them is no help in determining the answer to that question. So the provenance of a file, while important for other questions, is of no help in answering the question at issue here. The question here is to accept minified versions of files that have sources in orig tarball, Before that question even makes sense, a necessary prior question is: *Is it true* the sources for those minified files are actually in the orig tarball, and *how* does any recipient verifiably know that? I just try to have responses to the question I've adressed Should we remove from source tarball minified versions of source files existing in tarball. The response may depends on context but please deatails which kind of contest. I hope this makes it clearer. -- \ “Don't be afraid of missing opportunities. Behind every failure | `\ is an opportunity somebody wishes they had missed.” —Jane | _o__) Wagner, via Lily Tomlin | Ben Finney ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] drupal7-mod-jscommunicator is marked for autoremoval from testing
drupal7-mod-jscommunicator 1.0.1-1 is marked for autoremoval from testing on 2014-04-29 It (build-)depends on packages with these RC bugs: 735769: drupal7: Sourceless file ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] drupal7-mod-drucall is marked for autoremoval from testing
drupal7-mod-drucall 2.0.1-1 is marked for autoremoval from testing on 2014-04-29 It (build-)depends on packages with these RC bugs: 735769: drupal7: Sourceless file ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] drupal7-mod-arbiterjs is marked for autoremoval from testing
drupal7-mod-arbiterjs 1.0.0-1 is marked for autoremoval from testing on 2014-04-29 It (build-)depends on packages with these RC bugs: 735769: drupal7: Sourceless file ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
[Pkg-javascript-devel] drupal7-mod-jssip is marked for autoremoval from testing
drupal7-mod-jssip 1.0.0-1 is marked for autoremoval from testing on 2014-04-29 It (build-)depends on packages with these RC bugs: 735769: drupal7: Sourceless file ___ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
