On 11/8/18, Jochen Spieker <m...@well-adjusted.de> wrote: > Robert Arkiletian: >> >> https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/pyfltk >> >> I noticed that Debian and hence Ubuntu have dropped the "python-fltk" >> package. >> >> If I volunteer to be the maintainer of the package is there >> documentation I can read to learn how to become a package maintainer? > > You already received the relevant link for that.
There's also the Debian-Mentors listserv: https://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/ VERY patient responders on that list. If for any reason you don't receive an immediate response, you need to just give it time for someone to get a free moment to help. You can find "debian-policy" as a package, too. I THOUGHT that something similar to "maint-guide" just like Long Wind's link was also available, but it's not pulling up in Buster. Ok, yup, just checked my archive file hoard, and there's maint-guide from 2015 and 2017. Searches for "developer", "manual", and "guide" by themselves used to bring up LOTS of possibilities. Again... not in Buster? :) >> Also, if this package is maintained in Debian will it also need a >> maintainer in Ubuntu or will I also have to do that too. If yes, then >> can I just maintain it for Ubuntu? > > If you maintain it in Debian, chances are that Ubuntu will just pick up > automatically. I do not know the exact processes behind that. If you > only maintain it in Ubuntu, Debian will most certainly not include it > because you need a maintainer in Debian in any case. My choice to primarily follow Debian quite a long time ago now was based on a graph of the Linux family tree. Debian inspires a lot of derivatives so Developers' work here stands a larger chance of helping more users overall than if one opts to develop for a spinoff "child" distribution. For me, it's just a personal *_CHOICE_* thing. It's why I'm trying to self-teach about Linux itself these days, too (k/t Linux From Scratch/LFS). Top of the family tree. :) > Be it as may, Debian does not require any contributor to also contribute > directly to Ubuntu. Ubuntu just uses a lot of work that was originally > done for Debian. (I do not mean that as an insult, that's the way free > software works.) > >> The main reason I ask that is I know Debian supports many >> architectures, which I don't have access to. I was mainly just >> interested in maintaining the AMD64 arch. Is this possible? > > I do not think that you have to worry much about that. I expect most > package maintainers only have direct access to one or two architectures > and the main one being AMD64. The Debian build infrastructure will do > most of the work and I think if you need access to a machine of a > different architecture for debugging you can always ask the maintainers > of that architecture. What about QEMU? I've used it a few times but never got so far as to try outside of i386 and x86_64. Is QEMU viable as a starting point where using it would at least save a little bit of testing/configuring time for those who have the actual equipment? Or have I completely misunderstood how QEMU operates? Totally possible (!), but its description includes things like "full system emulation of some architecture" so that's why I brought it up. :) Ok, yeah, something's wrong with my "apt-cache search". I wanted to share some QEMU packages as final examples of available architectures... and this is all Buster is offering: xserver-xorg-video-qxl - X.Org X server -- QXL display driver qemu - fast processor emulator, dummy package Maybe things are on Developer hold? I don't remember that being a thing when I was using testing in the past, though. Seems like it was only apparent during upgrades. Feeling a little like I've just stepped off into the Twilight Zone. Where'd everybody go?! :)) Cindy :) -- Cindy-Sue Causey Talking Rock, Pickens County, Georgia, USA * runs with duct tape *