Bug#832391: Debian Med sprint (Was: Bug#832391: consensuscore2: Any news?)

[Andreas Tille]

Hi Afif,

just answering to a random mail of yous.  Thanks for drastically
increasing Debian Med activities since you joined the team.  Would you
consider joining our Sprint this year?  I agree that's a bit short
notice and a long travel.  However, I'd recommend joining DebConf in
Montreal.  As usual DebConf is an exciting event and I'll be there in
any case.

See you

Andreas.

On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 01:02:50AM -0800, Afif Elghraoui wrote:
> > I think it's
> > a good time to have this package removed.
> 
> FTR, I've just filed for its removal.

-- 
http://fam-tille.de

Bug#832391: consensuscore2: Any news?

[Afif Elghraoui]

على الخميس 22 كانون الأول 2016 ‫00:55، كتب Afif Elghraoui:
> 
> I think it's
> a good time to have this package removed.
> 

FTR, I've just filed for its removal.

regards
Afif

-- 
Afif Elghraoui | عفيف الغراوي
http://afif.ghraoui.name

Bug#832391: consensuscore2: Any news?

[Afif Elghraoui]

على الأربعاء 21 كانون الأول 2016 ‫08:01، كتب Adrian Bunk:
> On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 11:19:02PM -0800, Afif Elghraoui wrote:
>> ...
>> I'd like to just be a little conservative with this. Indeed, if
>> everything goes well with unanimity, we will need to file for this
>> removal. I'd just rather that unanimity be assuredly packaged before
>> removing this one.
> 
> If consensuscore2 should be in stretch, you have to fix this bug in the 
> consensuscore2 source package pretty soon.
> 

Thanks for your concern. I recently reviewed upstream changelogs, and it
looks like this version of consensuscore2 had some important bugs that
were fixed in the new version that's included in unanimity now. Because
of this and because there's no clear way to separate consensuscore2 from
the unanimity code base to include in this source package, I think it's
a good time to have this package removed.

> A new unanimity package would be too late for stretch (it would have
> to be packages, uploaded and accepted no later than this weekend).
> 

I've been working on this behind the scenes. pbcopper, a
build-dependency for unanimity, was recently accepted. I think I'm also
close to having the unanimity package completed. It is either unanimity
or nothing.

regards
Afif

-- 
Afif Elghraoui | عفيف الغراوي
http://afif.ghraoui.name

Bug#832391: consensuscore2: Any news?

[Adrian Bunk]

On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 11:19:02PM -0800, Afif Elghraoui wrote:
>...
> I'd like to just be a little conservative with this. Indeed, if
> everything goes well with unanimity, we will need to file for this
> removal. I'd just rather that unanimity be assuredly packaged before
> removing this one.

If consensuscore2 should be in stretch, you have to fix this bug in the 
consensuscore2 source package pretty soon.

A new unanimity package would be too late for stretch (it would have
to be packages, uploaded and accepted no later than this weekend).

> Thanks and regards
> Afif

cu
Adrian

-- 

   "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
   "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
   Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

Bug#832391: consensuscore2: Any news?

[Afif Elghraoui]

على الثلاثاء  6 كانون الأول 2016 ‫08:48، كتب Andreas Tille:
> Whoops, do you want me to reassign the bug back from ftp.debian.org to 
> consensuscore2?
> Or, before you simply answer it is may be faster if you do the reassigning 
> yourself (except if that's to cumbersome from your phone ...).

Thanks for handling this.


> Sorry if I totally missinterpreted the discussion. :-(

I'd like to just be a little conservative with this. Indeed, if
everything goes well with unanimity, we will need to file for this
removal. I'd just rather that unanimity be assuredly packaged before
removing this one.

Thanks and regards
Afif

-- 
Afif Elghraoui | عفيف الغراوي
http://afif.ghraoui.name

Bug#832391: consensuscore2: Any news?

[Afif Elghraoui]

على الثلاثاء  6 كانون الأول 2016 ‫06:48، كتب Andreas Tille:
> So I wonder whether we should turn this into an ITP unanimity[1].

I made a RFP for this with Cc to debian-med-packaging. The bug number
hasn't been issued yet, so I don't have a BTS link to post here.

>  The
> first stumbling stone is that they do not add release tags but have
> somehow switched of reporting this as an issue on Github (at least I
> can't find any contact to ask them for tags :-().

I've asked several times and they won't provide them for most of their
projects. From my experience, they also don't accept patches for
enhancements. The only support that can be expected from them is for
anything that aligns with their interests. Aside from whatever build
instructions are described in the repository, some hints for packaging
might be found in upstream's source integration builder:


Thanks and regards
Afif

-- 
Afif Elghraoui | عفيف الغراوي
http://afif.ghraoui.name

Bug#832391: consensuscore2: Any news?

[Andreas Tille]

Whoops, do you want me to reassign the bug back from ftp.debian.org to 
consensuscore2?
Or, before you simply answer it is may be faster if you do the reassigning 
yourself (except if that's to cumbersome from your phone ...).
Sorry if I totally missinterpreted the discussion. :-(
Kind regards
  Andreas.

On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 08:17:51AM -0800, Afif Elghraoui wrote:
> Whoa, wait a minute. Consensuscore2 hasn't been deprecated yet--it's just 
> been bundled with other things in the unanimity suite.
> The reason I don't support removal of this source package is that we might 
> find the best solution to be extracting consensuscore2 from unanimity and 
> using that for the orig tarball here. We will likely run into fhe same or 
> worse problems trying to package everything from one unanimity source package.
> I can elaborate when I get off work, but please do not remove this source 
> package.
> Afif
> Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device Original message From: 
> Andreas Tille <andr...@an3as.eu> Date: 12/6/2016  06:48  (GMT-08:00) To: 
> Ghislain Vaillant <ghisv...@gmail.com>, 832...@bugs.debian.org Cc: Debian Med 
> Project List <debian-...@lists.debian.org> Subject: Re: Bug#832391: 
> consensuscore2: Any news? 
> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 11:23:36AM +, Ghislain Vaillant wrote:
> > > 
> > > I should have posted an update. Upstream has moved consensuscore2 into a
> > > new source package, unanimity [1]. The packaging issues I was having are
> > > due to building the mixed-language code base. I have not found a good
> > > solution for this with debhelper, and the upstream build system was also
> > > very unconventional in order to handle it (which did not help
> > > debhelper's latching onto it). I think what needs to be done is to just
> > > package unanimity and have consensuscore2 be one of its binary packages.
> > > I'll have to see whether this problem will come up again after that.
> > 
> > I confirm Afif's reporting. This project is deprecated in favour of a larger
> > one.
> > 
> > We should just request an RM for this package, since we won't be getting any
> > support for it from upstream in the future, and focus on the new project. 
> > This
> > should also clear the current RC bug affecting it.
> 
> So I wonder whether we should turn this into an ITP unanimity[1].  The
> first stumbling stone is that they do not add release tags but have
> somehow switched of reporting this as an issue on Github (at least I
> can't find any contact to ask them for tags :-().
> 
> I'm personally fine with removing consensuscore2 package from Debian.
> 
> Afif, could you push your preliminary work how rudimentary / non-working
> it might be?  It just helps to display the current state on the tasks
> pages as prospective package in VCS (in case somebody is seeking for an
> interesting job ...)
> 
> Kind regards
> 
>    Andreas.
> 
> PS: I'll reassign #832391 to ftp.debian.org and turn it into a ROM request.
> 
> [1] https://github.com/PacificBiosciences/unanimity
> 
> -- 
> http://fam-tille.de
> 

-- 
http://fam-tille.de

Bug#832391: consensuscore2: Any news?

[Afif Elghraoui]

Whoa, wait a minute. Consensuscore2 hasn't been deprecated yet--it's just been 
bundled with other things in the unanimity suite.
The reason I don't support removal of this source package is that we might find 
the best solution to be extracting consensuscore2 from unanimity and using that 
for the orig tarball here. We will likely run into fhe same or worse problems 
trying to package everything from one unanimity source package.
I can elaborate when I get off work, but please do not remove this source 
package.
Afif
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device Original message From: 
Andreas Tille <andr...@an3as.eu> Date: 12/6/2016  06:48  (GMT-08:00) To: 
Ghislain Vaillant <ghisv...@gmail.com>, 832...@bugs.debian.org Cc: Debian Med 
Project List <debian-...@lists.debian.org> Subject: Re: Bug#832391: 
consensuscore2: Any news? 
Hi,

On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 11:23:36AM +, Ghislain Vaillant wrote:
> > 
> > I should have posted an update. Upstream has moved consensuscore2 into a
> > new source package, unanimity [1]. The packaging issues I was having are
> > due to building the mixed-language code base. I have not found a good
> > solution for this with debhelper, and the upstream build system was also
> > very unconventional in order to handle it (which did not help
> > debhelper's latching onto it). I think what needs to be done is to just
> > package unanimity and have consensuscore2 be one of its binary packages.
> > I'll have to see whether this problem will come up again after that.
> 
> I confirm Afif's reporting. This project is deprecated in favour of a larger
> one.
> 
> We should just request an RM for this package, since we won't be getting any
> support for it from upstream in the future, and focus on the new project. This
> should also clear the current RC bug affecting it.

So I wonder whether we should turn this into an ITP unanimity[1].  The
first stumbling stone is that they do not add release tags but have
somehow switched of reporting this as an issue on Github (at least I
can't find any contact to ask them for tags :-().

I'm personally fine with removing consensuscore2 package from Debian.

Afif, could you push your preliminary work how rudimentary / non-working
it might be?  It just helps to display the current state on the tasks
pages as prospective package in VCS (in case somebody is seeking for an
interesting job ...)

Kind regards

   Andreas.

PS: I'll reassign #832391 to ftp.debian.org and turn it into a ROM request.

[1] https://github.com/PacificBiosciences/unanimity

-- 
http://fam-tille.de

Bug#832391: consensuscore2: Any news?

[Andreas Tille]

Hi,

On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 11:23:36AM +, Ghislain Vaillant wrote:
> > 
> > I should have posted an update. Upstream has moved consensuscore2 into a
> > new source package, unanimity [1]. The packaging issues I was having are
> > due to building the mixed-language code base. I have not found a good
> > solution for this with debhelper, and the upstream build system was also
> > very unconventional in order to handle it (which did not help
> > debhelper's latching onto it). I think what needs to be done is to just
> > package unanimity and have consensuscore2 be one of its binary packages.
> > I'll have to see whether this problem will come up again after that.
> 
> I confirm Afif's reporting. This project is deprecated in favour of a larger
> one.
> 
> We should just request an RM for this package, since we won't be getting any
> support for it from upstream in the future, and focus on the new project. This
> should also clear the current RC bug affecting it.

So I wonder whether we should turn this into an ITP unanimity[1].  The
first stumbling stone is that they do not add release tags but have
somehow switched of reporting this as an issue on Github (at least I
can't find any contact to ask them for tags :-().

I'm personally fine with removing consensuscore2 package from Debian.

Afif, could you push your preliminary work how rudimentary / non-working
it might be?  It just helps to display the current state on the tasks
pages as prospective package in VCS (in case somebody is seeking for an
interesting job ...)

Kind regards

   Andreas.

PS: I'll reassign #832391 to ftp.debian.org and turn it into a ROM request.

[1] https://github.com/PacificBiosciences/unanimity

-- 
http://fam-tille.de

Bug#832391: consensuscore2: Any news?

[Ghislain Vaillant]

On Fri, 11 Nov 2016 14:17:13 -0800 Afif Elghraoui  wrote:
> Hi, Andreas,
> 
> على الأربعاء  9 تشرين الثاني 2016 ‫03:11، كتب 
> Andreas Tille:
> > 
> > do you have any news with this issue?
> > 
> 
> I should have posted an update. Upstream has moved consensuscore2 into a
> new source package, unanimity [1]. The packaging issues I was having are
> due to building the mixed-language code base. I have not found a good
> solution for this with debhelper, and the upstream build system was also
> very unconventional in order to handle it (which did not help
> debhelper's latching onto it). I think what needs to be done is to just
> package unanimity and have consensuscore2 be one of its binary packages.
> I'll have to see whether this problem will come up again after that.

I confirm Afif's reporting. This project is deprecated in favour of a larger
one.

We should just request an RM for this package, since we won't be getting any
support for it from upstream in the future, and focus on the new project. This
should also clear the current RC bug affecting it.

Ghis

Bug#832391: consensuscore2: Any news?

[Afif Elghraoui]

Hi, Andreas,

على الأربعاء  9 تشرين الثاني 2016 ‫03:11، كتب Andreas Tille:
> 
> do you have any news with this issue?
> 

I should have posted an update. Upstream has moved consensuscore2 into a
new source package, unanimity [1]. The packaging issues I was having are
due to building the mixed-language code base. I have not found a good
solution for this with debhelper, and the upstream build system was also
very unconventional in order to handle it (which did not help
debhelper's latching onto it). I think what needs to be done is to just
package unanimity and have consensuscore2 be one of its binary packages.
I'll have to see whether this problem will come up again after that.

regards
Afif

1. https://github.com/PacificBiosciences/unanimity

-- 
Afif Elghraoui | عفيف الغراوي
http://afif.ghraoui.name