Source: libao
Version: 1.2.2+20180113-1.3
Severity: normal
Tags: patch
X-Debbugs-Cc: [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], Ron Lee <[email protected]>, Package Salvaging Team
<[email protected]>, John Francesco Ferlito <[email protected]>,
[email protected], Christian Hofstaedtler <[email protected]>, Benjamin
Drung <[email protected]>
Hi Ron,
while preparing another NMU for libao I ran into a problem that I think
could be avoided by using a public packaging repository on Salsa,
preferably in the Debian namespace.
Back in January I prepared an NMU fixing three bugs[1]. Before it was
uploaded to unstable, Christian Hofstaedtler uploaded another NMU[2]
fixing a different issue. Since there was no shared public development
repository, neither of us could easily build on the other's work. As a
result, I now need to rebase and integrate the remaining changes before
I can upload the outstanding fixes.
Nothing went wrong here—both NMUs addressed different bugs—but a shared
public Git repository would have made combining the two lines of work
straightforward.
For this reason I have created
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/libao
and rebased the pending changes there. It is based on your private
repository[3] (which is currently not referenced by the package's
Vcs fields), together with all subsequent NMUs imported using
`gbp import-dscs`. This repository is the reason why I'm tagging
the bug report "patch".
I intend to upload these remaining fixes to DELAYED/15 immediately after
filing this bug, so I am using this report both to explain the
repository I created and to announce the NMU.
My motivation is not to change the package's maintenance model. You
would, of course, remain the package maintainer, and I would be happy
to continue contributing through the normal NMU process. My intention
is simply to make it easier for occasional contributors to collaborate
with each other, prepare merge requests, and combine independent fixes
before an upload becomes necessary.
I have found this workflow to work very well for many Debian packages,
particularly those that only receive occasional maintenance.
If you would rather keep the repository in your own Salsa namespace,
that is perfectly fine with me. In that case I would appreciate the
repository being public so contributors can collaborate using merge
requests. I would then remove the repository I created under the Debian
namespace to avoid duplicate repositories for the same package. My main
concern is simply that there be a single public place where packaging
work can be shared and combined
Kind regards
Andreas
[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=911232#22
[2]
https://tracker.debian.org/news/1707803/accepted-libao-12220180113-13-source-into-unstable/
[3] https://salsa.debian.org/ron/libao
-- System Information:
Debian Release: forky/sid
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (501, 'testing'), (50, 'buildd-unstable'), (50, 'unstable'), (5,
'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 7.0.13+deb14-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU threads; PREEMPT)
Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE not set
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
LSM: AppArmor: enabled
