Hello again, Nicholas ProtonMail wins this time, I shall send directly to the bug as of now.
> Since you're comfortable with git, please consider creating a Salsa > account and continuing to maintain the package in the Debian (previously > collab-maint) group. Here's more info on what that means: Sure, I'm absolutely fine with that > That's ok, and totally understandable. What I meant is that 1.30 isn't > that old compared to Bug #437932 (14 Aug 2007), #516307 from 2009. > Those look like they may have already been fixed upstream. Then there > are ones like #491078 that may have been fixed in Debian and/or > upstream, or could be fixed in the next upload to Debian. I'll check if those are resolved, of course; I'll add a suitable systemd service to resolve "missing-systemd-service-for-init.d-script". > > Thank you, I hope yours was as good as mine! > Sure was, thank you too and have a great day/night ! Best, Alexandru ------- Original Message ------- On Wednesday, May 31st, 2023 at 00:06, Nicholas D Steeves <s...@debian.org> wrote: > Hello Alexandrus, > > It appears that your mail user agent (possibly webmail) is encrypting > emails to me when you "reply all" to the bug; the effect is non-public. > It may be that the only way to fix that effect is to either 1. not CC me > (just send to the bug) 2. Make that interface forget my key, because it > always encrypts when a key is available. 3. Maybe there's a config > toggle that disables unconditional encryption, for use with mailing > lists? > > Alexandru Mihail alexandru_mih...@protonmail.ch writes: > > > Hello Nicholas, > > Of course, please quote the first email at the bug. My apologies for > > omitting to reply all :) > > > -- Re PM follows: > > > Thank you a lot for taking the time to sponsor my work, it is a great > > pleasure and honor for me to finally contribute to Debian packages, after > > 11 years of daily usage :) . Sorry for the later reply, it's morning here. > > > You're welcome! :) No worries with taking time to reply, and feel free > to ping me if I take to long to reply. > > > > "Do you intend to continue to maintain mini-httpd at this location (Vcs > > > location), or do you have a new one in mind?" > > > > Do you have any preferences/suggestions regarding this question? > > I am comfortable with git so forking on git wouldn't be a problem. I have > > no remote to share so far. > > > Since you're comfortable with git, please consider creating a Salsa > account and continuing to maintain the package in the Debian (previously > collab-maint) group. Here's more info on what that means: > > https://wiki.debian.org/Salsa/Doc#Collaborative_Maintenance:_.22Debian.22_group > > It's ok if you don't want to; however, in this case we'll need to update > the Vcs links in the package. > > > > "On the topic of work, has upstream resolved any of these old bugs" > > > > The latest upstream release is still mini_httpd-1.30.tar.gz. ACME > > produces quality releases in general, but their release cycle is > > pretty lethargic as they are a small team working on many tools. > > > That's ok, and totally understandable. What I meant is that 1.30 isn't > that old compared to Bug #437932 (14 Aug 2007), #516307 from 2009. > Those look like they may have already been fixed upstream. Then there > are ones like #491078 that may have been fixed in Debian and/or > upstream, or could be fixed in the next upload to Debian. > > > As context, I've worked professionally on patches for mini-httpd for about > > 9 months, adding PAM support and AAA authentication. Sadly, the license of > > my work is evidently proprietary. If I have the time I can try to tackle > > all the bugs alone, as I know everything that's happening in mini_httpd.c. > > I'll try mailing Jef (from ACME) to see if any fixes are in the pipeline. > > > Nice, it sounds like you're the ideal maintainer for Debian's > mini-httpd! It also sounds like you already know work to get things > merged upstream whenever possible. > > > I might need a wee bit of assistance with lintian errors/Debian > > conventions as I mainly come from RPM land. I've packaged debs before > > for my employer, but Debian's standards and procedures are very > > different (and that's a good thing !). > > > Oh good, you're already using lintian :) Please take care to use a > recent version like 2.116.3 or 2.115.1~bpo11+1 (bullseye backport). Run > it with the "--info" argument to get explanations. There is currently > one warning (W) that needs to be fixed before this package is ready to > upload. > > > I'm looking forward to your input and have a great weekend ! > > > Thank you, I hope yours was as good as mine! > > Regards, > Nicholas