Dear Andreas & All, Please see my comments inline,
On 03/15/2017 09:28 AM, Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi Zoltan, > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 12:35:47AM +0100, Zoltan Gyarmati wrote: >>> I agree that if there is a pkg-electronics team that is fine for me. >>> What would be not fine is if this team is not updating the electronics >>> task of Debian Science. Please make sure that all relevant packages are >>> mentioned there! >> IMHO the pkg-electronics could be indeed a more appropriate place for >> maintaining >> these packages, and also, they should be listed on the Debian >> Science/Electronics task. > Fine. BTW, in principle there is most probably room for an own Debian > Electronics Blend with its own fine grained tasks. Two years ago Debian > Astro evolved from Debian Science and it was a great success. If you > are interested I could prepare some framework template for electronics. > >> I believe that the packages are ready for the first iteration of review, >> and i also >> uploaded them to mentors.debian.net, pls find here [1] the aggregated list. > Well, I admit I take the freedom to sponsor right from team VCS only. > If you want me to sponsor your packages (which I happily do) just tell > me via "Sponsoring of Blends" page the Vcs location and the task a > package belongs to. My reason for deriving from the established > sponsoring procedure is to make Blends more popular (which is obviously > needed :-P) Yes, i would be happy to push my listed git repos to a team VCS, and thank you for the offering the sponsoration although before we go any further (mainly to avoid any duplicated effort) i want to see what would be the way we cooperate on this with Aaron and the pkg-electronics team. As i'm rather new in contributing to Debian itself, i'm a bit lost here how to proceed with this, so maybe you and/or Dima and/or Bdale could figure out how to do this. > >> The only issue i became aware of that these packages are released for >> unstable >> but they should be uploaded to experimental (due to the stretch freeze), > New packages can easily go to unstable. They will not migrate to testing > anyway. These are not new packages, they have been RFA-d by Uwe (the current maintainer) a month back see [1]. > >> It seems we nicely teamed up to maintain this, >> how should we proceed, should be check the corresponding >> RFAs to ITA? > Hmmm, I admit I do not understand this question. As these packages are requested for adoption again, see [1] according to my understanding on the debian mentors docs (see for example [2]) i (or my mentor/sponsor?) have to set it to ITA. > > Thanks for your work on the electronics packages > > Andreas. > >> [1] >> https://mentors.debian.net/package/sigrok-firmware-fx2lafw >> https://mentors.debian.net/package/pulseview >> https://mentors.debian.net/package/libsigrok >> https://mentors.debian.net/package/sigrok-cli >> https://mentors.debian.net/package/sigrok >> https://mentors.debian.net/package/libserialport [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=852830 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=852831 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=852832 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=852833 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=852834 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=852835 [2] https://wiki.debian.org/DebianMentorsFaq#How_do_I_make_my_first_package.3F Zoltan Gyarmati https://zgyarmati.de
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature