Hello, On Tue, 2024-01-16 at 15:53 +0100, Richard wrote: > Am Mo., 15. Jan. 2024 um 21:38 Uhr schrieb John Paul Adrian Glaubitz > <glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de>: > > On Mon, 2024-01-15 at 19:29 +0100, Richard wrote: > > > I second this report. The app did use to work actually, but recently - > > > not sure with > > > transitioning to ausweisapp with v2.0 or later, this breaks for me too. > > > > What breaks? Please be more specific! > > > > I mean the exact same behavior. App starts, it has an entry in the tray, but > no icon, > also none in the Gnome dock and no window is opening,
OK, it wasn't clear from your initial message. In any case, upstream is aware of the problem. > > > This renders the app completely unusable, at least using Gnome, which > > > should justify a > > > severity of important. It's quite irrelevant if the app is a Gnome, Gt or > > > whatever app. > > > > It is actually quite relevant because it is up to the upstream developer > > which configurations > > they support and which not. There is an endless number of Linux > > distributions and desktop > > environments, so it's naturally impossible to support all of them. > > > Sure, but it's part of Debian's repository. And if it's supposed to stay that > way, something > needs to be fixed. And for all I know this app doesn't have an official Linux > version. The > website calls it a community version. So whoever feels responsible, the > person maintaining it > in the Debian repositories and keeping it there or the person that ported the > app (not even > sure if the official app uses Qt). But the current state needs to be resolved > at least by the > time Trixie hits stable. Sure, it wouldn't be the best solution to dropp the > app altogether, > but having the app only on paper for many users isn't one either. As I said in my previous mail, this is not a packaging issue but an issue with the upstream source code itself. I am not really in the position to fix this as I am not familiar with the code. > > > > > Sure, the newer version right now is only available in testing and sid > > > (tested both, same > > > result). > > > > Errm, you shouldn't be installing packages from unstable on a stable system > > [1]. > > > > Who says I am? I am running testing. Also, getting security updates from > unstable is actually > recommended behavior, so the stuff around "FrankenDebian" is contradicting > itself. There is no version 2.0.x in Debian stable nor stable-backports yet, so unless you built the package yourself from the unstable sources or installed the Flatpak version, you created a "FrankenDebian". And, no, the wiki page regarding "FrankenDebian" is not contradicting itself because security updates are provided through debian-security. These updates are built to target Debian stable, so it's perfectly fine to install them without risking to break anything. > > > But that just makes it more important that this is sorted out before this > > > package is made > > > available in stable or stable-backports. Especially since running it as > > > Flatpak would > > > probably render half the app unusable since the communication with the > > > browser would > > > probably not work. > > > > FWIW, I am merely packaging the software for Debian. I am not the upstream > > developer. If > > you have problems with the software itself which is not related to > > packaging, you should > > direct your bug reports upstream. > > > > Unfortunately though, upstream actually does not officially support Linux, > > so they don't > > really care if it breaks. Thus, if you are really so annoyed by the > > software not working > > on your particular system, I am happy to request a removal of the package > > from the Debian > > archive mirrors so that I don't have to bother with such entitled bug > > reports anymore. > > > > Entitled? Well that's rich. The point of the whole bug reporting system is > exactly what we > are doing here. So yes, if you are unwilling to maintain the package, which > will always > include getting bug reports if things don't behave as intended, then don't do > it. Not really. If someone steps up to maintain something, it doesn't automatically mean they are responsible for supporting all possible configurations that exist within Debian which is what you are asking for. The package works perfectly fine on KDE which is what I am using myself. The limitations around GNOME support are an upstream issue and not related to packaging which is what I am doing. Claiming that a particular issue that is not a serious bug must be fixed before the next release is something that I would call entitlement. If you have figured out how to fix this particular problem, you are free to send a patch to me or upstream. That's how it works with community-maintained software. Neither me nor the upstream maintainer are actually getting paid to provide this application on Linux or on Debian, so it's perfectly fine that we get to decide how we spend our free time. Adrian -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer `. `' Physicist `- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
