Hi,
the week is over and here are the results from the vote:
There were 64 participants in total.
dh-make
===
46 people want dh-make recommended.
27 people (+ 3 with a question mark) want dh-make suggested.
58 people voted for (at least) one of the above options.
Recommending dh-make
On 19/10/2012 13:29, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 09:54:27PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
AIUI, most users of pristine-tar in git don't have the second of these
branches, which means the pristine-tar binary delta is done against the
upstream branch - so each pristine-tar blob
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 22:29:53 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 09:54:27PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
AIUI, most users of pristine-tar in git don't have the second of these
branches, which means the pristine-tar binary delta is done against the
upstream branch - so
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 01:02:59PM +0800, Chow Loong Jin wrote:
Actually most users of pristine-tar in git don't have the *first* of
these branches. They usually have an upstream branch which is
synthesized solely from importing tarballs using git
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 09:13:04AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 01:02:59PM +0800, Chow Loong Jin wrote:
Actually most users of pristine-tar in git don't have the *first* of
these branches. They usually have an upstream branch
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 10:16:35PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
The section to which you seem to be referring is relevant
specifically to image and icon files in Launchpad. If you replace
those with your own artwork or some other released under a
compatible license and respect any other
]] Dmitrijs Ledkovs
loggerhead is replacement for gitweb
As one of the alioth admins, I'd like to contest this statement.
loggerhead is a replacement for gitweb in the same way that crawling is
a replacement for sprinting.
Yes, we «run» it, but it's memory-hungry, slow and crash-prone. It
2012/10/18 Dmitrijs Ledkovs x...@debian.org:
bzr serve is the equivalent of git-daemon and it is builtin
loggerhead is replacement for gitweb
Last time I tried it, it seemed to support only one repository.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
On 18 October 2012 07:27, Tollef Fog Heen tfh...@err.no wrote:
]] Dmitrijs Ledkovs
loggerhead is replacement for gitweb
As one of the alioth admins, I'd like to contest this statement.
loggerhead is a replacement for gitweb in the same way that crawling is
a replacement for sprinting.
On 18 October 2012 08:13, Игорь Пашев pashev.i...@gmail.com wrote:
2012/10/18 Dmitrijs Ledkovs x...@debian.org:
bzr serve is the equivalent of git-daemon and it is builtin
loggerhead is replacement for gitweb
Last time I tried it, it seemed to support only one repository.
Maybe you didn't
Dmitrijs Ledkovs:
loggerhead is replacement for gitweb
Tollef Fog Heen:
Yes, we «run» it, but it's memory-hungry, slow and crash-prone.
Dmitrijs Ledkovs:
Yeah, I did end up using nginx uwsgi workers to actually host it
together with hosting bzr smart server as well.
If you'd care to
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 12:57:18PM +0400, Игорь Пашев wrote:
For git we have gitweb, gitolite, git-daemon, pristine-tar.
I'd like to have similar for bzr, hg and svn.
There's nothing specific to git about pristine-tar. In fact, it is much
more consistently used with bzr due to the top-notch
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
The last time I complained about non-pristine-tar git package repos on
IRC, I was told that pristine-tar doesn't scale. So apparently in git
usage, folks haven't worked out that the unpacked upstream source should
be tracked as a branch instead of
On 19/10/2012 11:16, Russ Allbery wrote:
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
The last time I complained about non-pristine-tar git package repos on
IRC, I was told that pristine-tar doesn't scale. So apparently in git
usage, folks haven't worked out that the unpacked upstream source
Chow Loong Jin hyper...@debian.org writes:
On 19/10/2012 11:16, Russ Allbery wrote:
What did you mean by that last sentence? I was unable to parse it. In
particular, I think I don't understand the difference between tracked
as a branch and track a pristine-tar delta against the upstream git
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 08:16:50PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
The last time I complained about non-pristine-tar git package repos on
IRC, I was told that pristine-tar doesn't scale. So apparently in git
usage, folks haven't worked out that the
On 19/10/2012 12:35, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 08:16:50PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
The last time I complained about non-pristine-tar git package repos on
IRC, I was told that pristine-tar doesn't scale. So apparently in git
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
The UDD branch model used in Launchpad has three branches (not counting
the pristine-tar objects):
- the upstream branch (as it exists upstream)
- a synthesized branch which merges from the upstream branch and tracks
the contents of the upstream
Russ Allbery r...@debian.org writes:
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
And if your packaging branch actually tracks the full source package
contents, then it would have to track the autogenerated files, so you
might actually be storing these files twice.
Delta compression should
On 19/10/2012 12:54, Russ Allbery wrote:
Delta compression should always take care of that, no matter how you
organize your repository.
It only works if your things are bitwise similar in the first place. But does
pristine-tar's delta bear any semblance to the original copy of the file? If you
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 09:54:27PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
AIUI, most users of pristine-tar in git don't have the second of these
branches, which means the pristine-tar binary delta is done against the
upstream branch - so each pristine-tar blob contains all the information
about
On Thu, 11 Oct 2012 16:31:00 -0700, Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org
wrote:
The popularity of subversion
for packaging is a measure of inertia and/or ignorance, not of the
appropriateness of the tool.
I find this attitute improperly offensive. The choice of tool is the
decision of the maintainer,
For git we have gitweb, gitolite, git-daemon, pristine-tar.
I'd like to have similar for bzr, hg and svn.
It's not about technology, but about collaboration.
That's why I prefer git.
2012/10/17 Marc Haber mh+debian-de...@zugschlus.de:
On Thu, 11 Oct 2012 16:31:00 -0700, Steve Langasek
On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 12:57:18 +0400
Игорь Пашев pashev.i...@gmail.com wrote:
For git we have gitweb, gitolite, git-daemon, pristine-tar.
I'd like to have similar for bzr, hg and svn.
It's not about technology, but about collaboration.
No, LP is good website for development with
2012/10/17 Hideki Yamane henr...@debian.or.jp:
No, LP is good website for development with collaboration.
Can I have my own LP, please?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
Hello,
On 17.10.2012 11:13, Игорь Пашев wrote:
2012/10/17 Hideki Yamane henr...@debian.or.jp:
No, LP is good website for development with collaboration.
Can I have my own LP, please?
https://dev.launchpad.net/Running should help you with that.
Have a great day,
Daniel
--
To
On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 13:13:42 +0400
Игорь Пашев pashev.i...@gmail.com wrote:
Can I have my own LP, please?
Well, you can get source code. see https://dev.launchpad.net/Trunk
# I just annoyed heavily relying on LP as my previous mails in thread.
However, it looks good for me.
--
Regards,
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 11:19:01AM +0200, Daniel Holbach wrote:
On 17.10.2012 11:13, Игорь Пашев wrote:
2012/10/17 Hideki Yamane henr...@debian.or.jp:
No, LP is good website for development with collaboration.
Can I have my own LP, please?
https://dev.launchpad.net/Running should help you
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 11:43:36PM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 11:19:01AM +0200, Daniel Holbach wrote:
On 17.10.2012 11:13, Игорь Пашев wrote:
2012/10/17 Hideki Yamane henr...@debian.or.jp:
No, LP is good website for development with collaboration.
Can I have my
Paul,
am Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 05:48:39PM -0400 hast du folgendes geschrieben:
With the danger of being sued if you put up the result onto the public
interwebs.
Could you please expand on that? Logo / trademark reasons or license
issues?
it's not very hard to find
On 2012-10-17 23:55:08 +0200 (+0200), Philipp Kern wrote:
am Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 05:48:39PM -0400 hast du folgendes geschrieben:
With the danger of being sued if you put up the result onto the public
interwebs.
Could you please expand on that? Logo / trademark reasons or license
On 17 October 2012 22:55, Philipp Kern pk...@debian.org wrote:
Paul,
am Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 05:48:39PM -0400 hast du folgendes geschrieben:
With the danger of being sued if you put up the result onto the public
interwebs.
Could you please expand on that? Logo / trademark reasons or
On 17 October 2012 09:57, Игорь Пашев pashev.i...@gmail.com wrote:
For git we have gitweb, gitolite, git-daemon, pristine-tar.
I'd like to have similar for bzr, hg and svn.
bzr-builddeb gives pristine-tar support
bzr serve is the equivalent of git-daemon and it is builtin
loggerhead is
On Oct 12, 2012, at 09:13 PM, Hideki Yamane wrote:
bzr-builddeb is, well, it seems that is useful in UDD (Ubuntu Distributed
Development, as Ubuntu packaging guide says) way, but now it heavily relies
on Launchpad in my point of view. And, packaging-dev can specify
vendor-specific
On Oct 12, 2012, at 02:22 PM, Benjamin Drung wrote:
How does bzr-builddeb depend on Launchpad? bzr is integrated into
Launchpad, but you can use bzr without Launchpad as every other DVCS.
$ bzr branch debianlp:mypackage
is one way to use Launchpad with bzr for Debian effectively. It's
On Oct 17, 2012, at 1:03 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Oct 12, 2012, at 02:22 PM, Benjamin Drung wrote:
How does bzr-builddeb depend on Launchpad? bzr is integrated into
Launchpad, but you can use bzr without Launchpad as every other DVCS.
$ bzr branch debianlp:mypackage
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 04:05:10AM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
On Oct 17, 2012, at 1:03 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Oct 12, 2012, at 02:22 PM, Benjamin Drung wrote:
How does bzr-builddeb depend on Launchpad? bzr is integrated into
Launchpad, but you can use
On 17 October 2012 03:05, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de wrote:
On Oct 17, 2012, at 1:03 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Oct 12, 2012, at 02:22 PM, Benjamin Drung wrote:
How does bzr-builddeb depend on Launchpad? bzr is integrated into
Launchpad, but you
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012, Craig Small wrote:
Steve with his years of packaging experience is not probably a good
sample of one to base this upon. I'd be curious to see if newer
packagers use it or not.
I still use dh-make from time to time. Mainly to get a template for
debian/control and
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 16:03:53 +1100
Craig Small csm...@debian.org wrote:
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 02:38:46PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
dh-make isn't so relevant now that debhelper 7 exists. cp
/usr/share/doc/debhelper/examples/rules.tiny debian/rules dch
--create, manually create
dh-make should be deprecated :-)
--
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/CALL-Q8yL-UtZ9rDMqkAQim9wZJRM8Bea1=tsyj6bub_t+pt...@mail.gmail.com
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 04:03:53PM +1100, Craig Small wrote:
Steve with his years of packaging experience is not probably a good
sample of one to base this upon. I'd be curious to see if newer
packagers use it or not.
I don't bother with dh-make anymore. Like Steve the (mixed-case! Argh!) .ex
Am Freitag, den 12.10.2012, 10:04 +0800 schrieb Paul Wise:
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 5:35 AM, Benjamin Drung wrote:
A poll is a good idea. Can you recommend a site that allows setting up a
poll?
The Debian secretary was at one point going to setup devotee for this
sort of thing, don't
Hi,
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 12:06:11 +0200
Benjamin Drung bdr...@debian.org wrote:
I have setup a poll for it:
https://dudle.inf.tu-dresden.de/Popularity_of_bzr-builddeb_and_dh-make/
Thanks! :) voted.
My opinion is as BTSed,
- dh-make is still usable for 1st step. Maybe experienced/skilled
Am Freitag, den 12.10.2012, 21:13 +0900 schrieb Hideki Yamane:
- bzr-builddeb is, well, it seems that is useful in UDD (Ubuntu Distributed
Development, as Ubuntu packaging guide says) way, but now it heavily
relies on Launchpad in my point of view.
How does bzr-builddeb depend on
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 12:06:11PM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote:
Thanks.
I have setup a poll for it:
https://dudle.inf.tu-dresden.de/Popularity_of_bzr-builddeb_and_dh-make/
I voted, thanks!
Cheers,
Adrian
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Hello!
Игорь Пашев has written on Friday, 12 October, at 12:29:
dh-make should be deprecated :-)
I don't agree with that. dh-make is very useful in some cases. And I have
created a lot of own packages already, some of them without dh-make but I
know good sides of it.
Andriy.
--
To
On Fri, 2012-10-12 at 21:13 +0900, Hideki Yamane wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 12:06:11 +0200
Benjamin Drung bdr...@debian.org wrote:
I have setup a poll for it:
https://dudle.inf.tu-dresden.de/Popularity_of_bzr-builddeb_and_dh-make/
Thanks! :) voted.
My opinion is as BTSed,
-
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 14:22:06 +0200
Benjamin Drung bdr...@debian.org wrote:
How does bzr-builddeb depend on Launchpad? bzr is integrated into
Launchpad, but you can use bzr without Launchpad as every other DVCS.
Just because I don't imagine use bzr without LP ;)
Yes, it can be used as you've
On Fri, 2012-10-12 at 21:40 +0900, Hideki Yamane wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 14:22:06 +0200
Benjamin Drung bdr...@debian.org wrote:
How does bzr-builddeb depend on Launchpad? bzr is integrated into
Launchpad, but you can use bzr without Launchpad as every other DVCS.
Just because I don't
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 14:46:41 +0200
Jelmer Vernooij jel...@debian.org wrote:
The workflow doesn't have to involve Launchpad either - I'm not using
Launchpad at all for my Debian packages. Just because the majority of
Bazaar users host their branches on Launchpad, doesn't mean that a
Bazaar
On 12 October 2012 13:52, Hideki Yamane henr...@debian.or.jp wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 14:46:41 +0200
Jelmer Vernooij jel...@debian.org wrote:
The workflow doesn't have to involve Launchpad either - I'm not using
Launchpad at all for my Debian packages. Just because the majority of
Bazaar
Craig Small csm...@debian.org writes:
debhelper has gotten smarter with every release and gradually what
dh-make has had to do is getting reduced. I'm not sure we're at the
point of removing dh-make (it's an open question; I'm really not sure)
but perhaps we will be there one day. As it was
Le Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 12:06:11PM +0200, Benjamin Drung a écrit :
Am Freitag, den 12.10.2012, 10:04 +0800 schrieb Paul Wise:
https://dudle.inf.tu-dresden.de/Popularity_of_bzr-builddeb_and_dh-make/
The poll will be closed in one week (if enough votes are collected).
Hello everybody,
if
Hi,
How popular are bzr-builddeb and dh-make in Debian? The current
situation is that packaging-dev recommends bzr-builddeb and suggests
dh-make. It was requested to drop bzr-builddeb from Recommends and add
dh-make [1]. The recommended packages of packaging-dev should be
recommended by most of
Hi!
Have you considered making a poll for this? Because everyone will tell
you a different oppinion...
For me, I think: bzr-builddeb is specific to Bzr, if you don't use
Bzr, it is useless. Instead, dh_make can be used to generate Debian
templates quickly, so it might be useful for more people,
A poll is a good idea. Can you recommend a site that allows setting up a
poll?
Am Donnerstag, den 11.10.2012, 23:29 +0200 schrieb Matthias Klumpp:
Hi!
Have you considered making a poll for this? Because everyone will tell
you a different oppinion...
For me, I think: bzr-builddeb is specific
Hi Benjamin,
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 10:38:08PM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote:
How popular are bzr-builddeb and dh-make in Debian? The current
situation is that packaging-dev recommends bzr-builddeb and suggests
dh-make. It was requested to drop bzr-builddeb from Recommends and add
dh-make [1].
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 02:38:46PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
bzr is the fourth most popular version control system in Debian according to
http://upsilon.cc/~zack/stuff/vcs-usage/. If you're going to demote
bzr-builddeb (which doesn't bother me), I think you should also be demoting
Am Donnerstag, den 11.10.2012, 14:38 -0700 schrieb Steve Langasek:
Hi Benjamin,
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 10:38:08PM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote:
How popular are bzr-builddeb and dh-make in Debian? The current
situation is that packaging-dev recommends bzr-builddeb and suggests
dh-make. It
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 11:57:55PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 02:38:46PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
bzr is the fourth most popular version control system in Debian according to
http://upsilon.cc/~zack/stuff/vcs-usage/. If you're going to demote
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 5:35 AM, Benjamin Drung wrote:
A poll is a good idea. Can you recommend a site that allows setting up a
poll?
The Debian secretary was at one point going to setup devotee for this
sort of thing, don't think that ever happened though.
If you want some FSAAS
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 02:38:46PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
dh-make isn't so relevant now that debhelper 7 exists. cp
/usr/share/doc/debhelper/examples/rules.tiny debian/rules dch
--create, manually create debian/control and debian/copyright, and that's
about it.
dh-make comes from the
63 matches
Mail list logo
