Bug#944463: ITP: golang-github-gofrs-uuid -- short description
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Dmitry Smirnov X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, pkg-go-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org Control: block 902677 by -1 Package name: golang-github-gofrs-uuid Version: 3.2.0 Upstream Author: Maxim Bublis License: Expat URL: https://github.com/gofrs/uuid Vcs-Browser: https://salsa.debian.org/go-team/packages/golang-github-gofrs-uuid Description: UUID library for Golang This library provides a pure Golang implementation of Universally Unique Identifiers (UUID) variant as defined in RFC-4122. This package supports both the creation and parsing of UUIDs in different formats. . The library supports the following UUID versions: * Version 1, based on timestamp and MAC address (RFC-4122) * Version 2, based on timestamp, MAC address and POSIX UID/GID (DCE 1.1) * Version 3, based on MD5 hashing of a named value (RFC-4122) * Version 4, based on random numbers (RFC-4122) * Version 5, based on SHA-1 hashing of a named value (RFC-4122) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#944471: ITP: ccv -- C-based Computer Vision Library
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Mo Zhou * Package name: ccv Version : x.y.z Upstream Author : Name * URL : https://github.com/liuliu/ccv * License : BSD-3 Programming Lang: C Description : C-based Computer Vision Library OpenCV dropped support for their C interface. Maybe some users will use this one in their C project instead.
Re: Usage of DEP5
Am Donnerstag, den 07.11.2019, 13:40 + schrieb Thorsten Glaser: [snip] > If forcing machine-readable copyright is required for UMEGAYA, > then I’m sorry to say I will be removing debian/upstream/metadata > from some of my packages rather. Why is a machine-readable debian/copyright (DEP5, accepted) mixed with debian/upstream/metadata (DEP12, just a draft) here? debian/upstream/metadata is completely optional. This draft has not even been accepted yet. I see heavy issues making this mandatory. It contains almost only non-packaging relevant information, which is not really necessary to provide that package. And the data contained can change at any time. But if we don't ship the projects license(s) files, debian/copyright IS mandatory. JFTR: I don't understand why a formalized format of debian/copyright is that hard to realize. Regards, Daniel signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Checksum validation of images and packages
Hello, I wrote a tool for checksum validation, which is located here: https://github.com/getsumio/getsum Currently I am hunting feed-backs, idea is you have remotely deploy servers in several zones and a scheduler run i.e. daily basis 'getsum -remoteOnly http://example.com/file expectedSum' against those servers and collect feedback. Project is very young also my first golang app but I believe I have finished fair part of application:) and I am planning to actively maintain. I was wondering if you see a use case here or give me some feedback:) Thank you & have a nice week Burak
Re: please avoid writing useless/annoying stuff in debian/gbp.conf (was: source only upload with git-buildpackage)
On 10/5/19 7:48 PM, Attila Szalay wrote: > I added the "pbuilder-options = --source-only-changes" option to the > [buildpackage] part of the debian/gbp.conf Please, *never* do that. It's generally a very bad idea to write anything to debian/gbp.conf. It's as if you were adding your text editor preferences in the package. Instead, please prefer writing in ~/.gbp.conf. Just an example: if someone is using pbuilder, and wants to add a new binary to your package, then your debian/gbp.conf will be super annoying, because in such case, we need to upload *with* binaries (as source-only uploads aren't possible in the NEW queue). Also, please remember that not everyone is using git-buildpackage, and that nobody is ever, forced to do so, even when using git for packaging (just calling plain sbuild works perfectly, for example). A few years ago, we decided to *completely* remove all traces of debian/gbp.conf inside the OpenStack team, and I very much enjoy this choice. The only annoying bit, is that now, everyone *must* write in ~/.gbp.conf this: [DEFAULT] ignore-branch = True By the way, it'd be nice if it became the default in git-buildpackage. This missleads everyone into writing a debian/gbp.conf just in order to tell git-buildpackage what branch to build with. Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)
Re: please avoid writing useless/annoying stuff in debian/gbp.conf (was: source only upload with git-buildpackage)
On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 11:20:45PM +0100, Thomas Goirand wrote: > > Please, *never* do that. It's generally a very bad idea to write > anything to debian/gbp.conf. It's as if you were adding your text editor > preferences in the package. Instead, please prefer writing in ~/.gbp.conf. I keep most of my git-buildpackage settings which are specific to my developer environment in ~/.gbp.conf. However, there are some gbp settings which are specific to the repository set up, and those I think, IMHO, *are* appropriate for debian/gbp.conf. For example: [DEFAULT] pristine-tar = True upstream-tag='v%(version)s' debian-branch=debian/master If you are going to be cloning the e2fsprogs repository and wanting to use gbp-buildpackage, you *will* want to use these settings, and putting them in ~/.gbp.conf doesn't work well, since they won't apply for all packages that they might want to build. Regards, - Ted
Bug#916202: ITP: golang-github-mmarkdown-mmark -- Mmark: a powerful markdown processor in Go geared towards the IETF
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Anthony Fok X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian...@lists.debian.org * Package name: golang-github-mmarkdown-mmark Version : 2.2.0-1 Upstream Author : Miek Gieben * URL : https://github.com/mmarkdown/mmark * License : BSD-2-Clause Programming Lang: Go Description : Mmark: a powerful markdown processor in Go geared towards the IETF Rationale: There has been interests to see Mmark v2.0.0 packaged. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: please avoid writing useless/annoying stuff in debian/gbp.conf (was: source only upload with git-buildpackage)
On 11/11/19 1:02 AM, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 11:20:45PM +0100, Thomas Goirand wrote: >> >> Please, *never* do that. It's generally a very bad idea to write >> anything to debian/gbp.conf. It's as if you were adding your text editor >> preferences in the package. Instead, please prefer writing in ~/.gbp.conf. > > I keep most of my git-buildpackage settings which are specific to my > developer environment in ~/.gbp.conf. However, there are some gbp > settings which are specific to the repository set up, and those I > think, IMHO, *are* appropriate for debian/gbp.conf. For example: > > [DEFAULT] > pristine-tar = True > upstream-tag='v%(version)s' > debian-branch=debian/master The first 2, yes. The last one, it's my opinion that it's useless, and that you only need it because "ignore-branch = True" isn't the default in git-buildpackage. It's ok as long as you always keep the same packagig branch, but if, like in my team, we need a new branch name every 6 months, and for 400+ repositories, then keeping the branch name declared in debian/gbp.conf becomes super annoying (as it forces one to change the "debian-branch" each time). Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)
