Hi Julien, On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 10:00:03PM +0200, Julien Yann Dutheil wrote: > > Sorry, that's not team maintenance. The only sensible place to do the > > maintenance of the Debian packaging is on git.debian.org. We have > > developed a complex system of tools working with this repository and > > there is no advantage to use Github. > > > > What I meant is for creating the first repository on git.debian.org, that > it should be initiated from our repository at > http://biopp.univ-montp2.fr/git/ and not from the github one. I realize I > misunderstood your previous email: I thought you had a tool to scan from > release tags,
Yes, that is true. It is called uscan and you should have written a file debian/watch that is processed by uscan. > but I understand that you do that from the debian git > repositories, right? So if I push a commit tagged 2.3.0 to git.debian.org, > then you will automatically create a new version of the package, is that > correct? Sorry, no. You push a tag to github (or whatever repository you might use) and uscan will recognise a new version. It will download the according tarball and this tarball will be used as source tarball for the next package. > If so it does not matter indeed where we push the commit from. Just work with your upstream code and tag the releases where the source is maintained (as you would do if there would be no Debian packaging attempt and several others projects are doing). > > > - We start with the latest stable version (2.2.0), for which we have > > > debian/ubuntu packages on our local repository but which are not yet on > > > debian (I think the latest there is 2.1.0) and the same for MafFilter. > > > > I'd suggest to base the first commit on the latest Debian release and > > inject your latest packaging on top of this. Where exactly do you have > > this packaging? > > We have everything here: http://biopp.univ-montp2.fr/repos/apt/ Ok, I'll have a look. > > > - I will tag the commits on the master branch of each lib / software with > > > version numbers. Is there a dedicated nomenclature for that or is sthg > > like > > > rel-2-2-0 good enough? > > > > I'd suggest simply 2.2.0. > > Ok. > > > > - While we're at it, may I ask if we could also package my software CoMap > > > (detection of coevolving positions in a molecule) which also depends on > > the > > > bpp libraries? > > > > Sure we can. I'm not sure whether you are interested in a Mentoring > > of the Month project[1]. > > I would love that! It depends however on the time requested for completing > the tasks... my time at the computer is getting more and more reduced > (unfortunately). You will spend the time you have. Since you seem to have some packaging skills this might not last that long. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
