Hi Joost,
On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 01:07:29AM +0200, Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote:
>
> Thanks for this reminder. For both r-cran-nfactors and r-cran-semplot there
> already _is_ work in our g...@salsa.debian.org:r-pkg-team : at
> r-cran-nfactors.git and r-cran-semplot.git .
By chance I stumbled upon these packages as pre-dependencies for some
other package. They also needed quite some more pre-depends, but all is
uploaded now.
> So no need for
> prepare_missing_cran_package for those.
For sure I forgot and just noticed when injecting my repository failed
since there was an existing one (same for some pre-dependencies you had
prepared before). I kept you as second Uploader for all those packages
you created repositories.
Admittedly the existing repositories were not really a help but rather
extra work. Dh-make-R became better over time and so I just have
overridden your work with a single commit. I guess the detailed history
is not that important.
> I cannot commit to maintaining these packages appear in a stable Debian
> release: I do all my R packaging work during $dayjob; I'm mainly interested in
> keeping the packages working on Debian stable, and somewhat in sync with
> upsteam. So that's technically what would end up in debian backports.
I would really appreciate if you would do more official backports. I
need to do this as well (currently even more for Debian 9 than for
Debian 10). It would be really help if you would join this so we could
share the workload. I have some **rudimentary** script which really
needs some work (or some research whether something better exists) here:
https://salsa.debian.org/med-team/community/helper-scripts/blob/master/do_backport
It helps a bit to automatise things but its not really reliably neither
well testet.
> The
> reason I stick the work in git @ salsa is I feel there's a chance others might
> benefit from it too. That's the reason I've recently not been very active in
> actually uploading it to NEW.
That's fine in general. However, as I said, dh-make-R becomes better
and better and there is probably no point to inject something that is
not really actively used in production.
> There some packages of me in our git now for which I've not yet posted ITP's.
> I believe this interferes badly with some of your workflows. Would it help
> you
> if I actually _would_ post ITP's? I'd be glad to.
I do not think its needed to file ITPs. Its just a script call away.
This can be done by the maintainer who actually wants to care for the
package.
> Also, debian/copyright of most of my recent packages is still lacking. I'll
> try to find time to work on that (note to self: have another look at cme).
That's partly what I mean. I just added LGPL-2.1 to dh-make-R since it
was lacking before. In case you might have generated the packaging with
an older dh-make-R and it has this license you need to copy-n-paste the
text manually. Creating from scratch would be less work. :-P
> What do you think?
I hope you can join official backporting for common profit. :-)
> PS: thanks for your talk @ debconf, I enjoyed the video!
Nice.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
