Re: A lot of pending packages
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 23:03:33 +0200 Vincent Danjean wrote: > On 11/06/2010 09:54, Thomas Goirand wrote: > > Right, I was being silly. Also, the word "experimental" adds more fear > > to the user than just "devel", which is good. Let me rephrase then. How > > about we accept MORE packages with LESS checks in Experimental, and have > > new maintainers forced in that repository, then if they are seen as > > responsive, we upload to SID? Could that be a sponsor's decision already > > right now, and be considered a good practice? > > I disagree with this new proposed used of experimental. If you do this, > you will end up with newbies using experimental to get new stuff and > breaking their system to us a big on-going transition in experimental. +1 Also, to get into experimental, NEW packages still have to go through the NEW queue and the ftpmaster team. A lot of packages that need sponsoring from mentors.debian.net are in no fit state to be accepted. This would be an abuse of experimental and a hindrance to other packages getting through NEW. OTOH if those requesting sponsorship were more open to packaging some of the orphaned packages listed under WNPP and qa.debian.org which have already been through NEW http://qa.debian.org/orphaned.html Number of packages: 250 http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=packa...@qa.debian.org main (428) What about if Debian QA packages were all to be deemed suitable for DM upload, including those which have been orphaned for over 2 months without a change of maintainer? Maybe when an orphaned package is uploaded with the change of maintainer to Debian QA, the DM upload field could also be set? I would be much more likely to consider sponsoring again if the people requesting sponsorship were prepared to work on existing orphaned packages rather than always insisting on new stuff. i.e. one reason packages are left pending is because NEW packages are a lot more work to sponsor than orphaned packages. Just because a package is orphaned, doesn't always mean that the package itself is unwanted, just that the original maintainer lost interest / time. There are some orphaned packages with both high popcon and high bug counts. Personally, I'd be much happier sponsoring uploads of those packages, including putting the packages under DM. -- Neil Williams = http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/ http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/ pgp4Sy7mcIhRL.pgp Description: PGP signature
Allowing QA uploads for DMs (was: A lot of pending packages)
Hi! Am 15.06.2010 09:50, schrieb Neil Williams: > OTOH if those requesting sponsorship were more open to packaging some of > the orphaned packages listed under WNPP and qa.debian.org which > have already been through NEW [..] > What about if Debian QA packages were all to be deemed suitable for DM > upload, including those which have been orphaned for over 2 months > without a change of maintainer? Maybe when an orphaned package is > uploaded with the change of maintainer to Debian QA, the DM upload > field could also be set? It's not that easy, as the current criteria for a DM upload are DMUA:Yes set AND listed as maintainer or uploader in the most recent upload to experimentatl or unstable IIRC. However, I like the idea :) Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c1743f6.2030...@schmehl.info
Re: libnss-myhostname instead of mangling /etc/hosts
Re: Joachim Breitner 2010-06-14 <1276516697.2751.7.ca...@kirk> > > at the moment, the Debian installer creates a /etc/hosts file > > containing the local host name¹, so that this name is resolvable even > > if not registered in the DNS. Unfortunately, this is a possible cause > > of problems when the user wants to change the hostname – he has to > > change it in /etc/hosts two. This sounds like an overly complicated solution to avoid user errors. What about simply making /etc/init.d/hostname.sh warn if the hostname isn't resolvable (locally)? I wouldn't want a .so file pulled into every program I execute (isn't that what nss does?) because some people cannot edit /etc/hosts. Christoph -- c...@df7cb.de | http://www.df7cb.de/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Indicator applets and related packages
Hi, On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 12:54:30PM +0200, Evgeni Golov wrote: > > > libindicator is currently collab-maint with kar...@d.o (CCed) and me, if > > > others want to join, we could start a "pkg-indicators" or something :) > > > > Or it could be "pkg-ayatana" that takes care of packaging the software > > that Ubuntu's Ayatana team releases: > > https://launchpad.net/ayatana > > *nod* > > I don't care for a name or being a part of another team instead of > creating a new one, just having helpers is great :) I've just created https://alioth.debian.org/projects/pkg-ayatana/ Everyone interested, please join :) > > I saw that you used Git for the packaging, while I also use git for all > > my own projects, I wonder if it would not make sense to use bzr for those > > Canonical projects since they are all maintained in bzr, and it would make > > it more likely to have upstream directly involved in the team. > > > > What do you think? > > > > Maybe James Westby could write an HOWTO for DD that are used to git on how > > to best maintain Ubuntu's software within Debian with bzr-builddeb. > > Never tried bzr, so no idea how complicated it is (I guess not too > different to git anyways). If there is a simple howto, I'll happily move > :) bzr seems a bit strange, but lets go for it for the sake of easier collaboration with Ubuntu :) -- Bruce Schneier can read and understand Perl programs. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100615122516.gi9...@dorei.kerker.die-welt.net
Bug#585998: ITP: django-pagination -- easy Digg-style pagination without modifying your views
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Boris Savelev * Package name: django-pagination Version : 1.0.5 Upstream Author : Eric Florenzano * URL : http://django-pagination.googlecode.com/ * License : BSD Programming Lang: Python Description : easy Digg-style pagination without modifying your views `django-pagination`` allows for easy Digg-style pagination without modifying your views. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100615145044.7957.51038.report...@krisik.kult.dom-com.net
Bug#585999: ITP: okasha -- trivial WSGI web framework for Python
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: "أحمد المحمودي" * Package name: okasha Version : 0.1.0 Upstream Author : Muayyad Alsadi * URL : http://okasha.ojuba.org * License : Waqf Public License Programming Lang: Python Description : trivial WSGI web framework for Python Almost do-nothing web framewrok that features: * WSGI-enabled ie. can be used with mod_wsgi, mod_python, fast cgi, cgi, with paste or even without even a server * light weight * can be tuned to be suitable for desktop apps or public web servers * no extra dependencies * very simple -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100615150147.28553.59191.report...@localhost.localdomain
Bug#586000: ITP: django-sorting -- django pagination with sorting
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Boris Savelev * Package name: django-sorting Version : 0.1 Upstream Author : directeur * URL : http://github.com/directeur/django-sorting/tree/master * License : BSD Programming Lang: Python Description : django pagination with sorting Like ericflo's django pagination, but this one does the sorting! used with ericflo's pagination, displaying tabular paginated and sortable data is very easy -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100615144130.7675.3534.report...@krisik.kult.dom-com.net
Bug#560244: ITP mysql-cluster
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Toni Mueller * Package name: mysql-cluster Version : 7.1.3 Upstream Author : Oracle * URL : http://dev.mysql.com * License : GPLv2 Programming Lang: C, C++ Description : cluster-enabled version of the MySQL database system Some time ago, MySQL upstream separated the development of the regular MySQL server, and MySQL-Cluster. Since, the Debian MySQL-Packagers Team has dropped the support for clustering from the regular MySQL server package. This package is inteded to fill the gap and bring MySQL cluster support back to Debian. Any help, esp. by the MySQL Packagers Team, would be MUCH appreciated. Kind regards, --Toni++ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100615153304.32279.qm...@oak.oeko.net
Bug#586004: ITP: django-filter -- Django application for allowing users to filter queryset dynamically
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Boris Savelev * Package name: django-filter Version : 0.5.3 Upstream Author : Alex Gaynor * URL : http://github.com/alex/django-filter/tree/master * License : BSD Programming Lang: Python Description : Django application for allowing users to filter queryset dynamically Django-filter is a reusable Django application for allowing users to filter queryset dynamically. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100615161457.2808.38818.report...@krisik.kult.dom-com.net
Re: Allowing QA uploads for DMs (was: A lot of pending packages)
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 11:12:22 +0200 Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote: > Hi! > > Am 15.06.2010 09:50, schrieb Neil Williams: > > > OTOH if those requesting sponsorship were more open to packaging some of > > the orphaned packages listed under WNPP and qa.debian.org which > > have already been through NEW > [..] > > What about if Debian QA packages were all to be deemed suitable for DM > > upload, including those which have been orphaned for over 2 months > > without a change of maintainer? Maybe when an orphaned package is > > uploaded with the change of maintainer to Debian QA, the DM upload > > field could also be set? > > It's not that easy, as the current criteria for a DM upload are DMUA:Yes > set AND listed as maintainer or uploader in the most recent upload to > experimentatl or unstable IIRC. True, but current criteria can be modified such as to assert that packa...@qa.debian.org is a "special maintainer" with regard to DM. All DD's are members of QA by default, it doesn't take much for that to be extended to those in the DM keyring. The primary restriction on uploads is the signing key, not necessarily the name or email address - this is especially true of QA packages which have no Maintainer: and no Uploaders: but every DD is allowed to upload with "QA upload" in the changelog and a valid DD signature on the .changes. > However, I like the idea :) :-) -- Neil Williams = http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/ http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/ pgpm5clobaAWN.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bindv6only once again
Na grupie linux.debian.devel napisałe(a)ś: >> I see only two ways of fixing proprietary Java (apart from fixing it >> upstream or ignoring the problem): >> * wrap java and java_vm binaries in some scripts setting LD_PRELOAD (in >> Debian package) > This won't work in some cases. Some native programs instantiate a JVM > from C/C++. I thought in this case java_vm is executed. >> * allow sun-java6-* packages to override bindv6only sysctl. > Is it allowed by the Debian policy ? In this case probably some mechanism to do it must be developed. I'm not sure if it's worth it. >> I hope Oracle will eventually fix the bug in Java allowing the change in >> (some) stable Debian release > There is no interest from Oracle on this issue: > http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6342561 I know, since I've reported this bug they only action was lowering its severity. >> (or OpenJDK will replace Sun's Java completely). > Last time I heard, Java 7 was expected for September 2010 but I am not > counting on it. It will happen eventually. If not before squeeze, then maybe before squeeze+1. Jarek. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100615181207.ga31...@vilo.eu.org
Re: Bindv6only once again
Na grupie linux.debian.devel napisałe(a)ś: >> I see only two ways of fixing proprietary Java (apart from fixing it >> upstream or ignoring the problem): >> * wrap java and java_vm binaries in some scripts setting LD_PRELOAD (in >> Debian package) >> or >> * allow sun-java6-* packages to override bindv6only sysctl. > > * allow bindv6only to be overridden by process instead of system-wide. You mean modifying kernel? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100615181336.ga26...@vilo.eu.org
Re: A lot of pending packages
* Neil Williams , 2010-06-15, 08:50: What about if Debian QA packages were all to be deemed suitable for DM upload, including those which have been orphaned for over 2 months without a change of maintainer? Maybe when an orphaned package is uploaded with the change of maintainer to Debian QA, the DM upload field could also be set? If a package is neglected, it is *harder* (sometimes way harder) to maintain, which makes it *less* suitable for DMs. I consider QA/adoption uploads without DD assistance unacceptable. -- Jakub Wilk signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#586022: ITP: pdfsharp-migradoc -- A set of libraries for creating and modifying PDF documents
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Chow Loong Jin * Package name: pdfsharp-migradoc Version : 1.31 Upstream Author : empira Software GmbH, Cologne (Germany) * URL : http://www.pdfsharp.net/ * License : MIT/X11 Programming Lang: C# Description : A set of libraries for creating and modifying PDF documents PDFsharp is a CLI library for processing PDF files. You create PDF pages using drawing routines known from GDI+. Almost anything that can be done with GDI+ will also work with PDFsharp. Only basic text layout is supported by PDFsharp, and page breaks are not created automatically. The same drawing routines can be used for screen, PDF, or meta files. MigraDoc is a CLI library which performs document generation. It supports almost anything you find in any good word processor. You just add paragraphs, tables, charts, arrange all this in sections, use bookmarks to create links, tables of contents, indexes, etc. MigraDoc will do the layout creating page breaks as needed. MigraDoc is capable of creating PDF, XPS, and RTF documents. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100615192417.4375.23217.report...@localhost
Re: Allowing QA uploads for DMs (was: A lot of pending packages)
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 21:28:19 +0200 Jakub Wilk wrote: > * Neil Williams , 2010-06-15, 08:50: > >What about if Debian QA packages were all to be deemed suitable for > >DM upload, including those which have been orphaned for over 2 months > >without a change of maintainer? Maybe when an orphaned package is > >uploaded with the change of maintainer to Debian QA, the DM upload > >field could also be set? > > If a package is neglected, it is *harder* (sometimes way harder) to > maintain, which makes it *less* suitable for DMs. I disagree completely. A new package has no end of potential pitfalls and non-obvious problems which inexperienced maintainers will miss. A "stale" or neglected package has at least had some attention in the first place and only needs a few tweaks, not a wholesale update to the latest-greatest-cool-gizmo status. Whether a package is orphaned or not has no particular bearing on the complexity of the packaging task compared to NEW packages. Adding yet another python script or CPAN package is not useful. Fixing stuff that is already in use is more helpful. Some are more difficult than others, same with NEW packages - it is up to the maintainer to decide. At least with an orphaned package, the maintainer often has a waiting community of users. New packages might take months to get more than a dozen users. This isn't about updating the upstream code, just keeping orphaned packages ticking over on something approaching current Policy instead of something pre-dating Etch. > I consider QA/adoption uploads without DD assistance unacceptable. A QA upload might just be a case of updating the Maintainer and fixing some lintian issues. You could see it "fixing stuff without the hassle of writing the manpage and copyright file". Could be more appealing than a new package where everything has to be done at once. OK, there are difficult packages which are orphaned but there are difficult packages which would be new to Debian too. There's also the instant feedback, instead of waiting for the package to get through NEW. There's no need to bring orphaned packages up to DH7, migrate the packaging into git or change all the patches over to a new system and the rest; it's orphaned, just make sure it is lintian clean, close a few bugs if you can. The existing packaging may be out of date but that's fine, unless the maintainer is going to adopt the package, it can stay "behind current" as long as it works. *Interest* in the package is much more important than the current state of that package. Encouraging maintainers to invest their time in QA makes more sense than adding more NEW packages to become the QA workload of the future. Directing everyone at NEW is counter-productive and encourages more horrible first-time packages. At least if people spend time on QA then the bugs filed against packages in QA stand half a chance of being fixed. -- Neil Williams = http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/ http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/ pgpzF10ZFux4r.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#586033: ITP: lua-event -- libevent bindings for Lua 5.1
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Enrico Tassi * Package name: lua-event Version : 0.1.1(prosody fork) Upstream Author : Thomas Harning , Matthew Wild * URL : http://code.matthewwild.co.uk/luaevent-prosody * License : LGPL Programming Lang: C, Lua Description : libevent bindings for Lua 5.1 This library is recommended for the prosody jabber server version 0.7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100615211636.4861.90828.report...@localhost.localdomain
Re: Bindv6only once again
Jarek Kamiński writes:
> Na grupie linux.debian.devel napisałe(a)ś:
> >> I see only two ways of fixing proprietary Java (apart from fixing it
> >> upstream or ignoring the problem):
> >> * wrap java and java_vm binaries in some scripts setting LD_PRELOAD (in
> >>
> >> Debian package)
> >>
> >> or
> >> * allow sun-java6-* packages to override bindv6only sysctl.
> >
> > * allow bindv6only to be overridden by process instead of system-wide.
>
> You mean modifying kernel?
Of course not, the kernel already provides everything needed for years, and
these dummy apps can still request bindv6only to 0 on the sockets they listen
on their own, which is also discussed at debian-ctte[1]:
int b = 0;
if (setsockopt(s, IPPROTO_IPV6, IPV6_V6ONLY, (char *)&b, sizeof(b))==-1)
perror("failed blah");
they would be still inferior to those opening two separate sockets (which
means more fine-grained control like listening on v4 or v6 or both, or
establish means to threat them specifically if necessary), but this is at least
easily doable for brain-damaged apps badly in need for 0.
[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2010/06/msg2.html
--
pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201006160018.47252.danc...@spnet.net
Re: Bindv6only once again
Am 15.06.2010 23:18, schrieb George Danchev:
Jarek Kamiński writes:
Na grupie linux.debian.devel napisałe(a)ś:
I see only two ways of fixing proprietary Java (apart from fixing it
upstream or ignoring the problem):
* wrap java and java_vm binaries in some scripts setting LD_PRELOAD (in
Debian package)
or
* allow sun-java6-* packages to override bindv6only sysctl.
* allow bindv6only to be overridden by process instead of system-wide.
You mean modifying kernel?
Of course not, the kernel already provides everything needed for years, and
these dummy apps can still request bindv6only to 0 on the sockets they listen
on their own, which is also discussed at debian-ctte[1]:
int b = 0;
if (setsockopt(s, IPPROTO_IPV6, IPV6_V6ONLY, (char *)&b, sizeof(b))==-1)
perror("failed blah");
they would be still inferior to those opening two separate sockets (which
means more fine-grained control like listening on v4 or v6 or both, or
establish means to threat them specifically if necessary), but this is at least
easily doable for brain-damaged apps badly in need for 0.
You have forget, that most apps, which does not work with = 1, are
non-free and mostly completly closed-source.
Yeah we could follow this way and say "f*** on non-free SW", but many
companies, which are using Debian, are also hosting non-free software on
it (we also do it); and it just breaks with this value.
What would our CEO say? "It is not working with Debian, but with every
other distro? Then install distro XYZ!"
I don't think, that this is a good idea :<
--
/*
Mit freundlichem Gruß / With kind regards,
Patrick Matthäi
GNU/Linux Debian Developer
E-Mail: pmatth...@debian.org
patr...@linux-dev.org
Comment:
Always if we think we are right,
we were maybe wrong.
*/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c17f1a0.9070...@debian.org
Re: A lot of pending packages
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 08:50:28AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > What about if Debian QA packages were all to be deemed suitable for DM > upload, including those which have been orphaned for over 2 months > without a change of maintainer? Maybe when an orphaned package is > uploaded with the change of maintainer to Debian QA, the DM upload > field could also be set? Ugh, what a terrible idea. DMs are by definition uploaders who have *not* yet demonstrated, to the satisfaction of the project, their capability to do unsupervised uploads of arbitrary packages. Why are you so eager to gut our QA processes? DMs should request sponsorship of QA uploads on debian-qa just like anybody else. If they consistently demonstrate their competence in this fashion, they should be recognized for this by making them full DDs - not by conferring additional rights on DMs that the DM admissions criteria aren't set up for! -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Allowing QA uploads for DMs (was: A lot of pending packages)
On 15 June 2010 21:59, Neil Williams wrote: > Encouraging maintainers to invest their time in QA > makes more sense than adding more NEW packages to become the QA > workload of the future. Directing everyone at NEW is counter-productive > and encourages more horrible first-time packages. I agree entirely with this goal - I'm not yet certain that allowing unrestricted QA uploads by DMs will solve that problem, although I wouldn't be against testing it out. For starters, it could only really be allowed for DMs, not any old packager, I think. So would this produce results among "normal" mentees? My understanding was that some DMs are interested only in the packages they already maintain, otherwise they would be in the NM queue - so this subset would be less likely to bother with orphaned packages, surely? As for the others... if the act of allowing unrestricted QA uploads would spur them to make lots of fixes, why do we not see DDs doing this all the time? (Advance warning: I'm interested in discussing the mentoring process at DebConf.) -- Tim Retout -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aanlktinxmtmvfpuhsi1pohers0xfzut_mln4-gxd_...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Allowing QA uploads for DMs (was: A lot of pending packages)
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 6:03 AM, Tim Retout wrote: > (Advance warning: I'm interested in discussing the mentoring process > at DebConf.) Please register a BoF in penta about it to give folks more advance warning. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aanlktimi55lc3p9jfnavb2pzwt0742psbcs8gklnc...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Bindv6only once again
OoO La nuit ayant déjà recouvert d'encre ce jour du mardi 15 juin 2010, vers 23:18, George Danchev disait : > they would be still inferior to those opening two separate sockets (which > means more fine-grained control like listening on v4 or v6 or both, or > establish means to threat them specifically if necessary), but this is at > least > easily doable for brain-damaged apps badly in need for 0. How an application which is working at level 7 and that don't want to care about level 3 is a brain-damaged app? No doubt that IPv6 support is so slow. -- I DID NOT WIN THE NOBEL FART PRIZE I DID NOT WIN THE NOBEL FART PRIZE I DID NOT WIN THE NOBEL FART PRIZE -+- Bart Simpson on chalkboard in episode AABF19 pgpPoVl9UzXO3.pgp Description: PGP signature
