Hi Jonas, On 26/10/2024 14:40, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > Quoting Matthieu Baerts (2024-10-26 14:01:08) >> On 10/09/2024 08:40, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: >>> Sorry, I messed up: libell dropped a few symbols with release 0.69, >>> and I sloppily assumed it was old obsolete ones unused anywhere - >>> without thoroughly checking that assumption. >>> >>> Affected packages are iwd (maintained by me, and fixed upstream >>> already so required just a rebuild) and mptcpd, where I've reported >>> the issue: https://github.com/multipath-tcp/mptcpd/issues/302 >> >> Thank you for the bug report! >> >> Sorry, I thought the bug was fixed with the patch mentioned on the >> GitHub issue, and I thought you were going to take it to quickly fix >> this build issue. > > I thought so too, but then life kicked in: I am currently doing a > late-in-life bachelor, and that swallows all my focus in waves of time.
Nice challenge! No problem, I understand. > So no, apology not accepted, because that was on me ;-) :) >> That's OK, I now took some time to create a new release for mptcpd on >> Debian including this patch, and that's when I found out there was >> another issue caused by ell 0.69. I sent a fix to the mptcpd repo, and >> included this second patch in a new mptcpd bug-fix release. > > That sounds great! > > >> I pushed my modifications to Salsa: >> >> https://salsa.debian.org/debian/mptcpd >> >> Everything looks OK there, except the piuparts job: >> >> https://salsa.debian.org/debian/mptcpd/-/jobs/6488504 >> >> But I think this is because the previous version cannot be installed >> with the latest version of ell, and that's expected, right? > > Correct: I added a "Breaks:" hint in newest libell* package, against > older releases of libmptcpd* - which seems to be what you are asking > for confirmation on. Yes, so the error I got was expected. I was able to install the new version (0.12-5) on Debian Sid, but it is currently not possible to install the previous one (0.12-4) because of the break in libell0. And on Debian testing, it is not possible to install the new version, because it depends on the last version of libell0 :) >> I then sent the new version to Debian Mentors. >> >> https://mentors.debian.net/package/mptcpd/ >> >> Do you think you could sponsor this small update please? If not, I >> understand, I can ask someone else. > > I don't do sponsoring - because I find it awkward how exactly the > responsibility is then split. > > What I prefer instead is long-term collaboration: Would you like to > have me on board as a co-maintainer of the mptcpd package in Debian? Yes, good idea! I'm totally fine with that! How can I do that? By adding your name to the "Maintainer" (without 's'?) field in debian/control file? It looks like it can only have one person / team, no? https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html Or should I use the Uploaders field? They mention the "co-maintainers" term there. Or do we need to create a team just for that? (Also, should I modify the current version on Salsa and re-tag?) (BTW, talking about Salsa, it looks like you didn't push the last version of ell: I can find the 0.69-1, but not the 0.69-2) > I have zero experience with mptcp as a protocol, but have glanced at it > curiously over the years. I also have no experience with the codebase > of the mptpd project. What I can offer is experience with packaging, > and - as you've noticed already - trust and access to releasing final > packages to Debian. That's good, what I'm missing is this experience with packaging :-) Also, I think it makes sense to have an experimented extra person involved on the packaging side, to avoid having the same person changing the code, and pushing it directly to Debian! Cheers, Matt -- Sponsored by the NGI0 Core fund.
