Hi Joost, On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 01:07:29AM +0200, Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote: > > Thanks for this reminder. For both r-cran-nfactors and r-cran-semplot there > already _is_ work in our g...@salsa.debian.org:r-pkg-team : at > r-cran-nfactors.git and r-cran-semplot.git .
By chance I stumbled upon these packages as pre-dependencies for some other package. They also needed quite some more pre-depends, but all is uploaded now. > So no need for > prepare_missing_cran_package for those. For sure I forgot and just noticed when injecting my repository failed since there was an existing one (same for some pre-dependencies you had prepared before). I kept you as second Uploader for all those packages you created repositories. Admittedly the existing repositories were not really a help but rather extra work. Dh-make-R became better over time and so I just have overridden your work with a single commit. I guess the detailed history is not that important. > I cannot commit to maintaining these packages appear in a stable Debian > release: I do all my R packaging work during $dayjob; I'm mainly interested in > keeping the packages working on Debian stable, and somewhat in sync with > upsteam. So that's technically what would end up in debian backports. I would really appreciate if you would do more official backports. I need to do this as well (currently even more for Debian 9 than for Debian 10). It would be really help if you would join this so we could share the workload. I have some **rudimentary** script which really needs some work (or some research whether something better exists) here: https://salsa.debian.org/med-team/community/helper-scripts/blob/master/do_backport It helps a bit to automatise things but its not really reliably neither well testet. > The > reason I stick the work in git @ salsa is I feel there's a chance others might > benefit from it too. That's the reason I've recently not been very active in > actually uploading it to NEW. That's fine in general. However, as I said, dh-make-R becomes better and better and there is probably no point to inject something that is not really actively used in production. > There some packages of me in our git now for which I've not yet posted ITP's. > I believe this interferes badly with some of your workflows. Would it help > you > if I actually _would_ post ITP's? I'd be glad to. I do not think its needed to file ITPs. Its just a script call away. This can be done by the maintainer who actually wants to care for the package. > Also, debian/copyright of most of my recent packages is still lacking. I'll > try to find time to work on that (note to self: have another look at cme). That's partly what I mean. I just added LGPL-2.1 to dh-make-R since it was lacking before. In case you might have generated the packaging with an older dh-make-R and it has this license you need to copy-n-paste the text manually. Creating from scratch would be less work. :-P > What do you think? I hope you can join official backporting for common profit. :-) > PS: thanks for your talk @ debconf, I enjoyed the video! Nice. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de