Re: Can aolserver4 be considered superseded and removed?
On 2018-07-19 21:11:01 [+0200], To Héctor Romojaro Gómez wrote: > On 2018-07-19 13:52:04 [+0200], Francesco P. Lovergine wrote: > > > > I am currious now if I am allowed to reassing [2] over to > > > > ftp.debian.org > > > > for the removal. > > > > > > Fine for me, let's wait for Frankie's opinion. > > > > I would propose a replace roadmap for people using aolserver4 (in both > > testing and stable) with usual replaces/provides/conflicts items, and add a > > *big* warn in NEWS about known changes and incompatibilities. > > it would be only for stable because it is already gone from testing. > Regarding my question of the removal of aolserver from unstable: Héctor > was okay with it but wanted to your (Frankie's) opinion. Are you okay, > too? Is this a yes then :)? I mean the roadmap as suggested by Francesco does not require to keep it unstable. I would reassing #891633 to ftp-master on SUN if I don't here an objection. Sebastian
Re: Can aolserver4 be considered superseded and removed?
On 2018-07-19 13:52:04 [+0200], Francesco P. Lovergine wrote: > > > I am currious now if I am allowed to reassing [2] over to > > > ftp.debian.org > > > for the removal. > > > > Fine for me, let's wait for Frankie's opinion. > > I would propose a replace roadmap for people using aolserver4 (in both > testing and stable) with usual replaces/provides/conflicts items, and add a > *big* warn in NEWS about known changes and incompatibilities. it would be only for stable because it is already gone from testing. Regarding my question of the removal of aolserver from unstable: Héctor was okay with it but wanted to your (Frankie's) opinion. Are you okay, too? > -- > Francesco P. Lovergine Sebastian
Re: Can aolserver4 be considered superseded and removed?
El jue, 19-07-2018 a las 13:52 +0200, Francesco P. Lovergine escribió: > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 01:07:24PM +0200, Héctor Romojaro Gómez > wrote: > > > We have naviserver in NEW [0] (for four months but okay). I don't > > > see > > > any reference to the aolserver4 package. I was expecting > > > something > > > like > > > Provides:/Replaces:/Package: for a transitional package to move > > > all > > > users from aolserver4 over to naviserver. > > > > I will add a "Replaces" to the naviserver package once it hits sid > > and > > i am able to upload a newer version. > > > > > I am currious now if I am allowed to reassing [2] over to > > > ftp.debian.org > > > for the removal. > > > > Fine for me, let's wait for Frankie's opinion. > > > > > There is also ITP for naviserver-modules [1] so I could then file > > > a > > > RM > > > for aolserver4-nsopenssl which I what I planned in the beginning. > > > Any objections? > > > > nsopenssl is replaced by naviserver itself, as it includes now the > > nsssl module, so there is no need to wait for the modules package > > :) > > > > I would propose a replace roadmap for people using aolserver4 (in > both testing > and stable) with usual replaces/provides/conflicts items, and add a > *big* warn > in NEWS about known changes and incompatibilities. There is a full upstream NEWS file including those: https://salsa.debian.org/tcltk-team/naviserver/blob/master/NEWS Not so easy to digest (~900 lines), but it is exhaustive. We could include it in /usr/share/doc/naviserver/ and point the user to it in the NEWS.Debian file. Kind regards, Héctor
Re: Can aolserver4 be considered superseded and removed?
El jue, 19-07-2018 a las 13:18 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard escribió: > Quoting Héctor Romojaro Gómez (2018-07-19 13:07:24) > > I will add a "Replaces" to the naviserver package once it hits sid > > and > > i am able to upload a newer version. > > You can upload a newer version now, while package is stillin NEW > queue. Thanks, was not aware of that. Héctor
Re: Can aolserver4 be considered superseded and removed?
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 01:07:24PM +0200, Héctor Romojaro Gómez wrote: We have naviserver in NEW [0] (for four months but okay). I don't see any reference to the aolserver4 package. I was expecting something like Provides:/Replaces:/Package: for a transitional package to move all users from aolserver4 over to naviserver. I will add a "Replaces" to the naviserver package once it hits sid and i am able to upload a newer version. I am currious now if I am allowed to reassing [2] over to ftp.debian.org for the removal. Fine for me, let's wait for Frankie's opinion. There is also ITP for naviserver-modules [1] so I could then file a RM for aolserver4-nsopenssl which I what I planned in the beginning. Any objections? nsopenssl is replaced by naviserver itself, as it includes now the nsssl module, so there is no need to wait for the modules package :) I would propose a replace roadmap for people using aolserver4 (in both testing and stable) with usual replaces/provides/conflicts items, and add a *big* warn in NEWS about known changes and incompatibilities. -- Francesco P. Lovergine
Re: Can aolserver4 be considered superseded and removed?
Quoting Héctor Romojaro Gómez (2018-07-19 13:07:24) > I will add a "Replaces" to the naviserver package once it hits sid and > i am able to upload a newer version. You can upload a newer version now, while package is stillin NEW queue. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: signature
Re: Can aolserver4 be considered superseded and removed?
Hi Sebastian, El mié, 18-07-2018 a las 21:41 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior escribió: > On 2018-02-27 18:34:13 [+0100], Héctor Romojaro Gómez wrote: > > El mar, 27-02-2018 a las 17:36 +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine > > escribió: > > > [...] > > > > > > I would suggest to provide a migration package for AOLserver > > > users > > > with a NEWS document about possible issues due to known problems. > > > > Agree. I will make openacs dependant on naviserver in the next > > version, > > once naviserver + its modules are in the archive. > > We have naviserver in NEW [0] (for four months but okay). I don't see > any reference to the aolserver4 package. I was expecting something > like > Provides:/Replaces:/Package: for a transitional package to move all > users from aolserver4 over to naviserver. I will add a "Replaces" to the naviserver package once it hits sid and i am able to upload a newer version. > I am currious now if I am allowed to reassing [2] over to > ftp.debian.org > for the removal. Fine for me, let's wait for Frankie's opinion. > There is also ITP for naviserver-modules [1] so I could then file a > RM > for aolserver4-nsopenssl which I what I planned in the beginning. > Any objections? nsopenssl is replaced by naviserver itself, as it includes now the nsssl module, so there is no need to wait for the modules package :) > [0] https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/naviserver_4.99.16-1.html > [1] https://bugs.debian.org/891650 > [2] https://bugs.debian.org/891633 Kind regards, Héctor
Re: Can aolserver4 be considered superseded and removed?
On 2018-02-27 18:34:13 [+0100], Héctor Romojaro Gómez wrote: > El mar, 27-02-2018 a las 17:36 +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine escribió: > > [...] > > > > I would suggest to provide a migration package for AOLserver users > > with a NEWS document about possible issues due to known problems. > > Agree. I will make openacs dependant on naviserver in the next version, > once naviserver + its modules are in the archive. We have naviserver in NEW [0] (for four months but okay). I don't see any reference to the aolserver4 package. I was expecting something like Provides:/Replaces:/Package: for a transitional package to move all users from aolserver4 over to naviserver. I am currious now if I am allowed to reassing [2] over to ftp.debian.org for the removal. There is also ITP for naviserver-modules [1] so I could then file a RM for aolserver4-nsopenssl which I what I planned in the beginning. Any objections? [0] https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/naviserver_4.99.16-1.html [1] https://bugs.debian.org/891650 [2] https://bugs.debian.org/891633 > Kind regards, > Héctor Sebastian
Re: Can aolserver4 be considered superseded and removed?
El mar, 27-02-2018 a las 17:36 +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine escribió: > [...] > > I would suggest to provide a migration package for AOLserver users > with a NEWS document about possible issues due to known problems. Agree. I will make openacs dependant on naviserver in the next version, once naviserver + its modules are in the archive. > I'll have a look to the current package. Thanks Frankie, will work in the naviserver-modules package in the meantime, just sent an ITP right now[1]. > Let's move this thread on > te pkg-tcltk-devel list. Added in CC, let's continue there. [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=891650 Kind regards, Héctor
Re: Can aolserver4 be considered superseded and removed?
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 05:15:46PM +0100, Héctor Romojaro Gómez wrote: I was meditating to replace Aolserver4 with Naviserver which is a fork but has has a few incompatibilities in its Tcl API. On those regards Naviserver is in much better state. https://bitbucket.org/naviserver/naviserver Just in case this has been overlooked, there is already some effort ongoing on the naviserver packaging. I filed an ITP[1] some time ago, and recently asked formally for a first upload of the package and permissions over it (i am a DM)[2]. Volunteers to do it are of course welcome :) Gulp! indeed I'm now remembering the ITP, but I missed the recent update. As the openacs maintainer, which is also dependant on aolserver4/naviserver, i would prefer to avoid maintaining different configurations for both, so i am in favor of just replacing the aolserver4 package with the new naviserver one, taking into account possible transition issues. I would suggest to provide a migration package for AOLserver users with a NEWS document about possible issues due to known problems. I'll have a look to the current package. Let's move this thread on te pkg-tcltk-devel list. [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=804043 [2] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-tcltk-devel/2018-February/003546.html Kind regards, Héctor -- Francesco P. Lovergine
Re: Can aolserver4 be considered superseded and removed?
Dear all, El mar, 27-02-2018 a las 15:17 +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine escribió: > On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 02:57:59PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior > wrote: > > [...] > I was meditating to replace Aolserver4 with Naviserver which is a > fork > but has has a few incompatibilities in its Tcl API. On those regards > Naviserver is in much better state. > > https://bitbucket.org/naviserver/naviserver > Just in case this has been overlooked, there is already some effort ongoing on the naviserver packaging. I filed an ITP[1] some time ago, and recently asked formally for a first upload of the package and permissions over it (i am a DM)[2]. Volunteers to do it are of course welcome :) As the openacs maintainer, which is also dependant on aolserver4/naviserver, i would prefer to avoid maintaining different configurations for both, so i am in favor of just replacing the aolserver4 package with the new naviserver one, taking into account possible transition issues. [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=804043 [2] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-tcltk-devel/2018-February/003546.html Kind regards, Héctor
Re: Can aolserver4 be considered superseded and removed?
On Tue, 27 Feb 2018 at 15:17:00 +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote: > I was meditating to replace Aolserver4 with Naviserver which is a fork > but has has a few incompatibilities in its Tcl API. On those regards > Naviserver is in much better state. Do you plan to use the aolserver4 name for that package? If it's a straight replacement under the same name, I can see the advantage in keeping the existing package around while you prepare that replacement; feel free to close the proposed-removal bug #891633 (or leave it open to make sure aolserver4 isn't in buster if the replacement isn't ready, whichever you prefer). If it's going to be under a different name anyway, then there's probably little value in keeping the aolserver4 package alive in the meantime, since the new name would have to go through NEW either way. smcv
Re: Can aolserver4 be considered superseded and removed?
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 02:57:59PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: Hi Francesco, I stumbled upon aolserver4 because aolserver4-nsopenssl is bot building against openssl 1.1 and the former is the only user. The first upload of aolserver4 4.5.1 was in 2009. I assume that this was the last release of the server by upstream. The homepage referenced in the package provides a (port 80 only) redirect to aol.com which does not mention the server (or I can't find it). The aol.com domain seems to be served by Apache Traffic Server. I get the feeling that AOL is no longer looking after its server from the old days. The popcon for the package is low. So my question: Can we remove aolserver4 from the archive? Sebastian I was meditating to replace Aolserver4 with Naviserver which is a fork but has has a few incompatibilities in its Tcl API. On those regards Naviserver is in much better state. https://bitbucket.org/naviserver/naviserver -- Francesco P. Lovergine
Can aolserver4 be considered superseded and removed?
Hi Francesco, I stumbled upon aolserver4 because aolserver4-nsopenssl is bot building against openssl 1.1 and the former is the only user. The first upload of aolserver4 4.5.1 was in 2009. I assume that this was the last release of the server by upstream. The homepage referenced in the package provides a (port 80 only) redirect to aol.com which does not mention the server (or I can't find it). The aol.com domain seems to be served by Apache Traffic Server. I get the feeling that AOL is no longer looking after its server from the old days. The popcon for the package is low. So my question: Can we remove aolserver4 from the archive? Sebastian
