(It's probably reasonable to take this offlist now; no one else has spoken up as being interested.)
On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 06:52:19PM +0000, Aaron Brady wrote: > I would still be interested yes, I'd let it fall off my radar because > without someone to sponsor my uploads it's hard to proceed and yeah, I aim > to eventually go for DM status. > > I went down a rabbit hole with pulseview which requires some fairly large Qt > dependency work to get up-to-date, but concentrating on the core sigrok > packages it should be possible to get those updated much sooner than > pulseview. > > I will need to see if that will definitely break / FTBFS the existing > pulseview version. Pulseview 0.2 is already not in testing due to a FTBFS so I wouldn't worry about it too much. 0.3 already supports QT5 which should make moving over easier. I think getting the core sigrok packages up to date is a good first step; probably in experimental during the freeze as there's a dependency from collectd on libsigrok2 which we don't want to affect. You previously mentioned using git-buildpackage; do you have an existing repo I can look at? > On Mon, 30 Jan 2017, Jonathan McDowell wrote: > > >Aaron, if you're still interested in getting involved in looking after > >these I can help with giving things a look over and sponsoring their > >uploads (with the aim that you'd eventually go for at least DM status > >and be able to do the uploads yourself). > > > >On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 06:44:54PM +0100, Uwe Hermann wrote: > >>Hi, I'm looking for a maintainer (or a team of maintainers) for all > >>sigrok packages in Debian (see www.sigrok.org for details). > >> > >>I've already officially RFA'd the packages a few minutes ago. > >> > >>Lack of spare time doesn't currently allow me to keep the packages > >>up-to-date in a timely manner, plus I'm part of upstream and I'd like > >>to spend more time with upstream development rather than distro stuff. > >> > >>Hence, I'm looking for active DDs to take over the following packages: > >> > >>libsigrok-dev - sigrok hardware driver library - development files > >>libsigrok0-dev - sigrok hardware driver library (transitional dummy package) > >>libsigrok2 - sigrok hardware driver library - shared library > >>libsigrokdecode-dev - sigrok protocol decoding library - development files > >>libsigrokdecode0-dev - sigrok protocol decoding library (transitional dummy > >>package) > >>libsigrokdecode2 - sigrok protocol decoding library - shared library > >>libserialport-dev - Crossplatform serial port handling library - > >>development files > >>libserialport0 - Crossplatform serial port handling library - shared library > >>pulseview - sigrok logic analyzer, oscilloscope, and MSO GUI > >>sigrok - Logic analyzer and protocol decoder software suite (metapackage) > >>sigrok-cli - command-line frontend for the sigrok software > >>sigrok-firmware-fx2lafw - Firmware for Cypress FX2(LP) based logic analyzers > >> > >>Optionally, there are also still old open RFPs for these additional (less > >>important) sigrok-related packages: > >> > >> #669073 RFP: sigrok-dumps -- example logic analyzer protocol data for > >> sigrok > >> #669074 RFP: sigrok-firmware -- firmware files for various logic analyzers > >> #681881 RFP: sigrok-util -- sigrok related utilities > >> > >>If any active DD is interested in taking over these packages, please > >>go ahead, no need to ask for permission. It probably makes sense to > >>have at least the packages that directly depend on each other be > >>maintained by the same DD(s). > >> > >>I'll be happy to answer any questions regarding upstream releases, > >>shared libs, versioning, etc. etc. However, I'll not be able to do any > >>sponsoring or mentoring of non-DDs (lack of spare time, see above). J. -- /-\ | Mac system message: Like, dude, |@/ Debian GNU/Linux Developer | something went wrong. \- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
