- Forwarded message from Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: BTS version tracking
To: Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> I'm really dumb today, I manag
Hi,
I have to start yet another discussion about our packaging
practise. Did anyone ever take a look at our
/usr/share/doc//README{,.gz} files? If the users have
difficulties with a package, we often reply "Why didn't you read
the README? It's called README for a reason!" However, the
README f
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Trygve Laugstøl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libqdox-java
Version : 1.5
Upstream Author : Aslak Hellesøy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Joe Walnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mike Royle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Trygve Laugstøl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libjline-java
Version : 0.9.1
Upstream Author : Marc Prud'hommeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://jline.sourceforge.net
* License : BSD
Description : Java li
Hi Akira,
On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 10:24:05PM +0900, akira yamada / やまだあきら wrote:
> Nico Golde wrote:
> > Do you have an idea how many of them are packaged with
> > 1.8 too?
> The following source packages generate binary packages
> for ruby1.6 only:
Thanks for this list. It appears that the fol
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Trygve Laugstøl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libjmock-java
Version : 1.0.1
Upstream Author : Steve Freeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Tim Mackinnon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Nat Pryce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Trygve Laugstøl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: maven2
Version : 2.0beta1
Upstream Author : Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Emmanuel Venisse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
hi,
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 05:35:35AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > I don't know about aswiki, rsjog, tdiary (tdiary-plugin)
> > and tictactoe. (I use tDiary on ruby1.8 and I have no problem.)
tictactoe (0.8.1-2) has been uploaded yesterday and
Hi,
as a conclusion of many discussions at DebConf5, I propose to
maintain all packages by teams. A fine way to do this, is by
having a pkg- project at alioth.debian.org. It is useful to
invite non-DDs, esp. upstream developers and people from Debian
derivatives to participate in such teams.
As
also sprach W. Borgert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.08.14.1615 +0200]:
> V. If not at least two maintainers can be found for a particular
>package, it is not worthwhile to have it in Debian, at least
>not in a release. experimental is OK.
[...]
> VIII. Packages not maintained by teams are n
On Sunday 14 August 2005 02.40, Robert Collins wrote:
> On a related note, should we consider defining a convention similar to
> soname for dynamic languages like perl/python etc? I.e. for a python
> library 'foo', install the code as 'foo1', and have a dummy package
> 'foo' which has a __init__.p
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Christoph Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: dealer
Version : 0.20040530
Upstream Authors: Hans van Staveren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Henk Uijterwaal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.dombo.org/henk/deale
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 06:09:57PM +0200, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Christoph Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * Package name: dealer
> Version : 0.20040530
> Upstream Authors: Hans van Staveren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Henk Ui
On 10381 March 1977, W. Borgert wrote:
> as a conclusion of many discussions at DebConf5, I propose to
> maintain all packages by teams.
No, thanks.
> VI. The advantages of team maintenance outweigh the problem of
> team maintenance overhead.
Not everywhere, no.
> VII. Team maintainence he
On Sunday 14 August 2005 18:58, Jesus Climent wrote:
> 1. the name of the package might be a namespace polution, since it is
> too generic.
Possibly bridge-player would be a good alternative.
> 2. after reading and re-reading both the description and the long
> description, i have no clue whatsoe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
W. Borgert wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have to start yet another discussion about our packaging
> practise. Did anyone ever take a look at our
> /usr/share/doc//README{,.gz} files? If the users have
> difficulties with a package, we often reply "Why didn't you
[W. Borgert]
> as a conclusion of many discussions at DebConf5, I propose to
> maintain all packages by teams.
I agree that it is good to maintain packages in teams, to make sure
the project is less vulnerable to single maintainers going on
vacation, becoming sick, being run over by a bus or other
On Sunday 14 August 2005 19:11, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Sunday 14 August 2005 18:58, Jesus Climent wrote:
> > 1. the name of the package might be a namespace polution, since it is
> > too generic.
>
> Possibly bridge-player would be a good alternative.
Eh, bridge-dealer of course. Sorry.
--
To UN
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 07:11:43PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
>> 1. the name of the package might be a namespace polution, since it is
>> too generic.
> Possibly bridge-player would be a good alternative.
bridge-dealer, preferrably? It doesn't really play bridge...
>> 2. after reading and re-reading
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 06:58:40PM +0200, Jesus Climent wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 06:09:57PM +0200, Christoph Berg wrote:
> > * Package name: dealer
...
> > Description : bridge hand generator
...
> 2. after reading and re-reading both the description and the long description,
> i
On Sat, Aug 13, 2005 at 09:25:05PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> We have a good start at a list, to find the rest we need to:
>
> - Check lintian for usr-doc symlink warnings. (Unfortunatly
> lintain.debian.org is partially down right now.)
Should work correctly again.
http://lintian.debian.org/re
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 12:55:11PM -0400, Benjamin Seidenberg wrote:
> While I agree the README can be confusing, I think we do a disservice
> to our upstream by not including it. Some readers may be interested in
> the people who brought them the software, or knowing upstream's email
/usr/share/d
W. Borgert wrote:
> VIII. Packages not maintained by teams are not to go into
> unstable/testing/stable.
Does this mean you are volunteering as a team member for all packages
that currently have only one maintainer?
--
Antti-Juhani
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Jesus Climent in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > * Package name: dealer
> > Version : 0.20040530
> > Upstream Authors: Hans van Staveren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Henk Uijterwaal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > * URL : http://www.dombo.org/henk/dealer.html
> > * Li
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 07:51:47PM +0200, Christoph Berg wrote:
> (Maybe ITPs should include the proposed section (games in this case)
> to resolve confusions like these.)
Or better, as sections become obsolete, the proposed debtags.
Cheers,
--
W. Borgert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, http://people.debia
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 07:11:43PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
>
> > 2. after reading and re-reading both the description and the long
> > description, i have no clue whatsoever what the program is for.
> > Hopefuly in the final package it will be reworded...
>
> For someone who has played bridge, th
Hello,
This email address is no longer in use; please use [EMAIL PROTECTED]
instead.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 12:02:36PM +, W. Borgert wrote:
>
> - "Readme file for ."
>
> Really?
Well, you want to know which package a README belongs to when you get a README
without any other information... right?
--
Jesus Climent info:www.pumuki.org
U
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 08:17:53PM +0200, Jesus Climent wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 12:02:36PM +, W. Borgert wrote:
> > - "Readme file for ."
> >
> > Really?
>
> Well, you want to know which package a README belongs to when you get a README
> without any other information... right?
Nice
Perhaps the upstream README should be renamed 'README.upstream'?
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Aug 14, "W. Borgert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> as a conclusion of many discussions at DebConf5, I propose to
> maintain all packages by teams. A fine way to do this, is by
"One size fits all" methods are a bad idea. Different packages and
different maintainers have different requirements.
Benjamin Seidenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> I think a better solution would be to duplicate all the important
> information about the software into the README.Debian and train users
> to read that soley.
If I was king of the world (or at least of Debian), I would go the
more radical route
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> their files. Or do you suggest to tag all files in Debian with
> such an information? :-)
Open a man page.
Gruss
Bernd
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 08:45:43PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Aug 14, "W. Borgert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > as a conclusion of many discussions at DebConf5, I propose to
> > maintain all packages by teams. A fine way to do this, is by
> "One size fits all" methods are a bad idea. Differ
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 10:10:42PM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > their files. Or do you suggest to tag all files in Debian with
> > such an information? :-)
>
> Open a man page.
Because it has a NAME section? OK, you won :-)
Cheers,
--
W. Borgert
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005, W. Borgert wrote:
> [snip]
>
> IX. As alioth becomes even more important to Debian, we will
> have to strengthen (HA-ing) this resource.
>
> X. Teams shall meet online or in sauna. They are allowed to do
>DDR or ballroom dancing.
>
> [Dogme05 is, of course, a pun on D
W. Borgert writes:
> as a conclusion of many discussions at DebConf5, I propose to maintain
> all packages by teams.
You would have a team maintain 'units'? That's silly.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROT
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 03:52:55PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> Haha, this gave me a good laugh for an email. Altho, as far as jokes go, this
> was rather poorly delivered.
If I would make my living as an entertainer or comedian, I would
have to live on social security or be hungry :-( Sorry.
Chee
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 03:42:23PM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> You would have a team maintain 'units'? That's silly.
If the team maintains only the package 'units', yes. If the
same team maintains multiple relating packages, it's different.
E.g. the Debian XML/SGML group maintains 22 packages.
[John Hasler]
> You would have a team maintain 'units'? That's silly.
I guess it is equally silly as it is to maintain prebaseconfig in a
team. The prebaseconfig package is very simple, and maintained by a
team together with a lot of other very simple packages. It works
quite well to maintain s
I wrote:
> You would have a team maintain 'units'? That's silly.
W. Borgert writes:
> If the team maintains only the package 'units', yes. If the
> same team maintains multiple relating packages, it's different.
There are no packages related to units.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
The following is a list by maintainer of the 497 packages that still
contain code in their postinst to create links in /usr/doc/. That's been
a bug since 2002, and most of these packages have probably not been
updated since then, since recompiling most of them with a current
debhelper will remove t
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 11:28:41PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> I guess it is equally silly as it is to maintain prebaseconfig in a
> team. The prebaseconfig package is very simple, and maintained by a
> team together with a lot of other very simple packages. It works
> quite well to maint
On Sun, 2005-08-14 at 14:15 +, W. Borgert wrote:
> as a conclusion of many discussions at DebConf5, I propose to
> maintain all packages by teams.
It's a nice ideal.
> It is useful to
> invite non-DDs, esp. upstream developers and people from Debian
> derivatives to participate in such teams.
Scripsit Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> The following is a list by maintainer of the 497 packages that still
> contain code in their postinst to create links in /usr/doc/.
Some of these packages have been orphaned, but have not yet had their
maintainer fields switched to QA.
> That's been a bug
On Sun, 2005-08-14 at 12:55 -0400, Benjamin Seidenberg wrote:
> While I agree the README can be confusing, I think we do a disservice
> to our upstream by not including it.
That's my gut feeling too.
> I think a better solution would be to duplicate all the important
> information about the softw
Hi,
* Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-08-15 00:49]:
> The following is a list by maintainer of the 497 packages that still
> contain code in their postinst to create links in /usr/doc/. That's been
> a bug since 2002, and most of these packages have probably not been
> updated since then, since
On 15/08/05, Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> * Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-08-15 00:49]:
> > The following is a list by maintainer of the 497 packages that still
> > contain code in their postinst to create links in /usr/doc/. That's been
> > a bug since 2002, and most of thes
Henning Makholm wrote:
> > That's been a bug since 2002,
>
> Huh? The closest I can find in policy is a footnote reading:
>
> | At this phase of the transition, we no longer require a symbolic
> | link in /usr/doc/. At a later point, policy shall change to make the
> | symbolic links a bug.
>
>
Hi,
It seems like my mail is getting dropped somewhere
for some reason.
I'm Cc'ing debian-devel so that I don't have to go and hunt for
this mail every month I decide to resend.
I've revoked my previous key; I need this key to enter Debian Keyring
in order to operate as a Debian Developer.
T
Scripsit Ben Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Sun, 2005-08-14 at 12:55 -0400, Benjamin Seidenberg wrote:
>> While I agree the README can be confusing, I think we do a disservice
>> to our upstream by not including it.
> That's my gut feeling too.
I don't think we should base gut feelings solel
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> Please fix your packages. Filing bugs on nearly 500 packages is
> something I'd prefer not to do
Why do you have filled bug reports, then? Only for my packages?
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=322813
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugr
Scripsit Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Henning Makholm wrote:
>> I agree that it *should* be a bug, but I cannot see that it officially
>> *has* been one for three years.
> You're right. However, I think it's past time to change policy and make
> it a bug.
Agreed.
--
Henning Makholm "And h
On Sat, Aug 13, 2005 at 03:47:37PM +0200, Ana Guerrero wrote:
>Package: wnpp
>Owner: Ana Guerrero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Severity: wishlist
>
>
>* Package name: empy
> Version : 3.3
> Upstream Author : Erik Max Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>* URL : http://www.alcyone.com/soft
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 02:15:43PM +, W. Borgert wrote:
> Hi,
>
> as a conclusion of many discussions at DebConf5, I propose to
> maintain all packages by teams. A fine way to do this, is by
> having a pkg- project at alioth.debian.org. It is useful to
> invite non-DDs, esp. upstream develop
On Aug 15, John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why not rather move towards a more BSD approach, where any developer
> can commit changes to any package? It would work around having the
Any developer can already "commit" changes to any package. The obvious
problem is that it is very hard to
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Michael Spang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: mozilla-firefox-webdeveloper
Version : 0.9.3
Upstream Author : Chris Pederick
* URL : http://chrispederick.com/work/
* License : GPL
Description : web developer exten
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Michael Spang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: gjlv
Version : 1.0.4
Upstream Author : Bodo Pfelzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://gjlv.sourceforge.net/
* License : (GPL, LGPL, BSD, MIT/X, etc.)
Description :
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 05:08:00AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Aug 15, John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Why not rather move towards a more BSD approach, where any developer
> > can commit changes to any package? It would work around having the
> Any developer can already "commit"
Junichi Uekawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It seems like my mail is getting dropped somewhere for some reason.
It's likely hiding somewhere, along with other keyring related mail.
I've yet to see a reply to the mail I sent to keyring-maint 10 months
ago.
> I'm Cc'ing debian-devel so that I don
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> Regardless of whether or not I agreed with the changes, there is a real
> problem in the sense that my package under revision control is no longer
> in sync with whatever is in the archive. I know that NMUs also pose the
> same problem, but one of
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 02:18:39AM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
...a lot of wise things...
I have to agree. So how to proceed? File minor bugs against
README files, that contain predominantly useless information?
Cheers,
--
W. Borgert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, http://people.debian.org/~debacle/
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 08:29:47PM -0300, Ben Armstrong wrote:
> Says who? I maintain some packages like this. Let's say I support 50
> to 100 niche users for a given package, but I'm the only developer in
> the user community who cares to maintain the package in Debian. I
> maintain the package
"W. Borgert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Sorry, if people thought I want to propose enforcement of "team
> maintenance policy". However, team maintenance for all essential
> and standard is worthwhile and not un-realistic.
It's a good idea to discuss it, unless it's been discussed to death
alr
64 matches
Mail list logo
