Bug#581888: RM: neon26 -- ROM; outdated, no upstream / security support
Hi, On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 12:00:30PM +0200, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote: * Sebastian Harl tok...@debian.org [100517 18:25]: Possibly, fusedav could print a message telling the user that it has been deprecated and pointing to davfs2. I'm gonna talk to the upstream maintainer about that. Would be nice if your upstream can comment this situation. Meanwhile please patch it to build with neon version 0.27 or above. Yep, will do. Any progress on that? This bug report is idleing arround for quite some time... Darn! I knew, I forgot to do something :-/ Uploaded a minute ago. Sorry for the delay! Cheers, Sebastian -- Sebastian tokkee Harl +++ GnuPG-ID: 0x8501C7FC +++ http://tokkee.org/ Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. -- Benjamin Franklin signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#581888: RM: neon26 -- ROM; outdated, no upstream / security support
Hi! * Sebastian Harl tok...@debian.org [100517 18:25]: Possibly, fusedav could print a message telling the user that it has been deprecated and pointing to davfs2. I'm gonna talk to the upstream maintainer about that. Would be nice if your upstream can comment this situation. Meanwhile please patch it to build with neon version 0.27 or above. Yep, will do. Any progress on that? This bug report is idleing arround for quite some time... Best Regards, Alexander signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#581888: RM: neon26 -- ROM; outdated, no upstream / security support
block 581888 by 532763 thanks Hi, On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 12:07:12AM +0200, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote: It has only one reverse dependency, fusedav. That as well an outdated and incomplete package. Incomplete in what respect? I do not consider software incomplete just because of their (low) version number. Its last upload was almost three years ago and still stuck at version 0.2 . It should be removed as well I (the maintainer of the Debian package) do not agree with that. The last upstream version was released three years ago and I did not have much reason to upload a new revision. I've got a patch ready to port fusedav to a newer version of neon [1]. I asked upstream for a comment about that and inclusion in his tree, but I did not get an answer so far and then lost track of it (it worked for me and so there was no reason to change that -- so far). I will upload a new version shortly which will include this patch. Also, please note that fusedav currently has a popcon of 339. This is not a lot but still, imho, it's not completely insignificant. davfs2 package is much more robust and recent while maintained correctly. This packages does look more promising and it might make sense to migrate to in the long run. Anyway, I don't see a reason for a hard transition. Possibly, fusedav could print a message telling the user that it has been deprecated and pointing to davfs2. I'm gonna talk to the upstream maintainer about that. Cheers, Sebastian [1] see http://git.tokkee.org/?p=fusedav.git;h=b65859f -- Sebastian tokkee Harl +++ GnuPG-ID: 0x8501C7FC +++ http://tokkee.org/ Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. -- Benjamin Franklin signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#581888: RM: neon26 -- ROM; outdated, no upstream / security support
Hi, On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 12:12 +0200, Sebastian Harl wrote: On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 12:07:12AM +0200, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote: It has only one reverse dependency, fusedav. That as well an outdated and incomplete package. Incomplete in what respect? I do not consider software incomplete just because of their (low) version number. I mean #514330 [1] which states that fusedav can copy files to the DAV share, but can't read files _from there_ (neither copy or cat a file). Also it's not ported to neon 0.27, which is released back in 2007 august. Three years should have been enough for such a small change (your patch is short at least). I (the maintainer of the Debian package) do not agree with that. The last upstream version was released three years ago and I did not have much reason to upload a new revision. OK, but does it work for you to read remote hosted files? Possibly, fusedav could print a message telling the user that it has been deprecated and pointing to davfs2. I'm gonna talk to the upstream maintainer about that. Would be nice if your upstream can comment this situation. Meanwhile please patch it to build with neon version 0.27 or above. Cheers, Laszlo/GCS [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=514330 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#581888: RM: neon26 -- ROM; outdated, no upstream / security support
Hi, On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 05:47:08PM +0200, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote: On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 12:12 +0200, Sebastian Harl wrote: On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 12:07:12AM +0200, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote: It has only one reverse dependency, fusedav. That as well an outdated and incomplete package. Incomplete in what respect? I do not consider software incomplete just because of their (low) version number. I mean #514330 [1] which states that fusedav can copy files to the DAV share, but can't read files _from there_ (neither copy or cat a file). I was able to reproduce that but it does not happen all the time. Unfortunately, I don't know yet how to reliably reproduce that and, thus, don't know how to fix it. I will look into this in more detail as time permits (or if I get actually struck by it ;-)). Also it's not ported to neon 0.27, which is released back in 2007 august. Three years should have been enough for such a small change (your patch is short at least). Well, as I said before, I did not see any need to do so, so far. Possibly, fusedav could print a message telling the user that it has been deprecated and pointing to davfs2. I'm gonna talk to the upstream maintainer about that. Would be nice if your upstream can comment this situation. Meanwhile please patch it to build with neon version 0.27 or above. Yep, will do. Cheers, Sebastian -- Sebastian tokkee Harl +++ GnuPG-ID: 0x8501C7FC +++ http://tokkee.org/ Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. -- Benjamin Franklin signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#581888: RM: neon26 -- ROM; outdated, no upstream / security support
Package: ftp.debian.org Severity: normal Hi FTP-Team, neon26 is unsupported for a while now and outdated with three major upstream versions (neon27 is version 0.29[.3]) at the moment. It has only one reverse dependency, fusedav. That as well an outdated and incomplete package. Its last upload was almost three years ago and still stuck at version 0.2 . It should be removed as well, davfs2 package is much more robust and recent while maintained correctly. Regards, Laszlo/GCS signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
