Hi and thanks for the suggestion. While I wait for my *-guest account to join collab-main and somebody to pick up the RFP for RAMLfications I have noticed that:
- upstream has renamed the buildslave component "worker", also on pypi: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/buildbot-worker - the upstream git repo https://github.com/buildbot/buildbot has the code for both the master component (which matches the Debian buildbot package) and the worker component (which matches the Debian buildbot-slave package) therefore I **think** that: - we should rename the buildbot-slave package to buildbot-worker - we should generate both buildbot and buildbot-worker binary packages from the same source package "buildbot" - we can forget about the tarballs on pypi; debian/watch should point to the https://github.com/buildbot/buildbot/tags - the packaging for 0.9.1 should start from a fresh git repo; reusing https://github.com/buildbot/debian-buildbot and https://github.com/buildbot/debian-buildbot-slave is possible by manually transferring the files / patches, but the upstream branch will be radically different what do you think ? Paolo On 10/11/2016 13:54, Andrii Senkovych wrote: > Hi Paolo, > > I think collab-maint is the right place for it. Also, what did you use > as an upstream source? Was it pip URL or the repo on github? I think > we should move to the github repo because buildbot-www package is > already a build artifact produced by build procedures from github > repo. That's where nodejs and friends come in. Granted, buildbot as a > standalone pip package does not need nodejs to be built. > > Info on collab-maint and collaborative maintenance of the package: > https://wiki.debian.org/Alioth/Git
