Re: MBF: switching away from homepage pseudo-header
[ adding -qa for the neglected-packages-busting part ]
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 03:59:33PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
My own reading of this thread is that we can go ahead with this MBF.
You can find attached the template and actual package list, ready for
mass-bug invocation. Barring new objections, I'll file it tomorrow.
Done. The bug overview page on the BTS is at:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=homepage-field;users=debian...@lists.debian.org
Once filed, I'll provide an export of packages still affected, in case
others want to use the list for other QA efforts such as orphaning /
removal, as requested by some participants in the thread.
Ditto. The daily generated listing of still affected packages is at:
http://upsilon.cc/~zack/stuff/homepage-field/mbf-homepage-outstanding.txt
As suggested by others in this thread, the above list can give extra
points when looking for abandoned packages. It didn't exclude packages
where the bug is currently marked pending though, patches welcome (see
http://upsilon.cc/~zack/stuff/homepage-field/ for code info.)
Cheers.
« If you can't measure it, it doesn't exist. »
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Quando anche i santi ti voltano le spalle, | . |. I've fans everywhere
ti resta John Fante -- V. Capossela ...| ..: |.. -- C. Adams
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: MBF: switching away from homepage pseudo-header
Le dimanche 13 février 2011 à 17:57 +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit : IMHO one upload per Debian release with a recent Standards-Version should be done for every package. It shows that the maintainer is active and continues to be interested in the package. Given that our release cycle is 1 year minimum this is a not too hard request. Thanks for volunteering to help. It is appreciated. -- .''`. : :' : “You would need to ask a lawyer if you don't know `. `' that a handshake of course makes a valid contract.” `--- J???rg Schilling -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1297675346.3044.213.camel@meh
MBF: switching away from homepage pseudo-header
Upgrading my own server to Squeeze, I've stumbled upon some stats that
I've been maintaining for quite a while. One of them is about how Debian
packages declare upstream homepage, by using either the old Homepage
pseudo-header in package description or the new field as per policy
§5.6.23, or both(!). Live data about that are available at [1].
The advantage of the new format is that it is uniformly handled by
various services, such as the PTS and packages.d.o, and can be more
uniformly extracted from package information.
I hereby propose a mass bug filing, severity minor, requesting migration
to the proper debian/control field. A dd-list is attached. Please let
me know if you spot false positives.
Cheers.
PS lintian has a warning-level tag about that [2], which reports 250
packages vs 279 reported by my script. I'll check where the
differences come from before actually reporting the bugs.
[1] http://upsilon.cc/~zack/stuff/homepage-field/
[2] http://lintian.debian.org/tags/description-contains-homepage.html
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Quando anche i santi ti voltano le spalle, | . |. I've fans everywhere
ti resta John Fante -- V. Capossela ...| ..: |.. -- C. Adams
Gregory Colpart (evolix) r...@evolix.fr
php-date
php-file
Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) f...@debian.org
iselect
Adam Cécile (Le_Vert) gand...@le-vert.net
cobalt-panel-utils
pythondialog
stymulator
yum-metadata-parser (1.1.2-1)
Jari Aalto jari.aa...@cante.net
dlume
David Villa Alises david.vi...@uclm.es
ows
Bill Allombert ballo...@debian.org
gap-ctbllib
gap-gdat
Nacho Barrientos Arias ch...@criptonita.com
libconvert-ber-perl
Nacho Barrientos Arias na...@debian.org
pysesame
Chris AtLee ch...@atlee.ca
rofs-fuse
Richard Atterer atte...@debian.org
hama-slide-mouse-control
Sebastien Bacher seb...@debian.org
gdeskcal
gtkterm (0.99.5-1)
rubrica
Alan Baghumian a...@technotux.org
aspell-hy
Edelhard Becker edelh...@debian.org
cvstrac
Chris Vanden Berghe chris...@debian.org
meanwhile
Fathi Boudra fbou...@free.fr
log4cpp-doc
Nicholas Breen nbr...@ofb.net
jigl
Paul Brossier p...@debian.org
aconnectgui
alsamixergui
Ross Burton r...@debian.org
libgconf-bridge
Paul Cager paul-deb...@home.paulcager.org
id3tool
micro-proxy
Martin Braure de Calignon braur...@free.fr
gaim-themes
Devin Carraway de...@debian.org
libclamav-client-perl
Francesco Cecconi francesco.cecc...@gmail.com
libemail-find-perl
libhtml-fromtext-perl
Cyril Chaboisseau cyril.chaboiss...@free.fr
qgo
Arnaud Cornet arnaud.cor...@gmail.com
libbluecloth-ruby
Kevin Coyner kcoy...@debian.org
bbmail
bbrun
bbtime
imediff2
kodos
mailcheck
mrename
rpl
Tibor Csögör t...@tiborius.net
wpp
Jure Cuhalev gand...@owca.info
aspell-sl
Paul Cupis p...@cupis.co.uk
doctorj
Luke Cycon lcy...@gmail.com
keytouch
Rafael D'Leon rafaeldl...@gmail.com
balance
Debian Arabic Packaging Team debian-arabic-packa...@lists.alioth.debian.org
aspell-ar
aspell-ar-large
aspell-fa
Debian GIS Project pkg-grass-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
gpx2shp
Debian Java Maintainers pkg-java-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
libjazzy-java
libswidgets-java
libtoolbar-java
Debian KDE Extras Team pkg-kde-ext...@lists.alioth.debian.org
keep (0.4.0-1)
Debian Perl Group pkg-perl-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
libdata-walk-perl
libemail-send-io-perl
libtie-ical-perl
Debian Python Modules Team python-modules-t...@lists.alioth.debian.org
pyip
Debian Science Team debian-science-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
suitesparse-metis
Debian VoIP Team pkg-voip-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
stun
Debian/Ubuntu Zope Team pkg-zope-develop...@lists.alioth.debian.org
python-mechanize
Kenny Duffus ke...@duffus.org
dcfldd
Michel Dänzer daen...@debian.org
driconf
Zak B. Elep zak...@spunge.org
ecb
gnome-ppp
libmemcache
Raphael Enrici black...@club-internet.fr
yersinia
Baruch Even bar...@debian.org
ketchup
mdk
Khalid El Fathi inv...@edena-fr.org
gpass
Alexandre Fayolle afayo...@debian.org
pyqonsole (0.2.0-2.3)
python-unit
Bartosz Fenski fe...@debian.org
csmash-demosong
netw-ib-ox-ag
pystatgrab (0.4-1.1)
Charles Fry c...@debian.org
courierpassd
courieruserinfo
php-simpletest
wmfire
Hans Fugal h...@fugal.net
nyquist
Alexander GQ Gerasiov g...@cs.msu.su
mdf2iso
Martin A. Godisch godi...@debian.org
cgoban
wmpuzzle
Thomas Goirand tho...@goirand.fr
php-auth-http
php-config
php-image-barcode
Diego Andrés Asenjo González dase...@avatar.com.co
asterisk-prompt-es-co
Jack Grahams jackgrah...@inbox.com
png2html
Mod_removeip Packaging Group mod_remov...@lists.riseup.net
libapache-mod-removeip
Debian QA Group
Re: MBF: switching away from homepage pseudo-header
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 12:12:51 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: PS lintian has a warning-level tag about that [2], which reports 250 packages vs 279 reported by my script. I'll check where the differences come from before actually reporting the bugs. Isn't the lintian warning enough? Or do we actually need the bugs for some reason? Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: MBF: switching away from homepage pseudo-header
Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org (13/02/2011): I hereby propose a mass bug filing, severity minor, requesting migration to the proper debian/control field. That might also be a sign of packages lacking love, maybe some of them should be orphaned or dropped instead? KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: MBF: switching away from homepage pseudo-header
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 12:27:34PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote: Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org (13/02/2011): I hereby propose a mass bug filing, severity minor, requesting migration to the proper debian/control field. That might also be a sign of packages lacking love, maybe some of them should be orphaned or dropped instead? +1 Very outdated debhelper versions, policy versions and very aged last upload dates could be signs of MIA developers and abandonware. -- Francesco P. Lovergine -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110213113154.ga2...@frankie.is-a-geek.org
Re: MBF: switching away from homepage pseudo-header
Hi there! On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 12:31:54 +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote: On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 12:27:34PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote: Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org (13/02/2011): I hereby propose a mass bug filing, severity minor, requesting migration to the proper debian/control field. That might also be a sign of packages lacking love, maybe some of them should be orphaned or dropped instead? +1 Very outdated debhelper versions, policy versions and very aged last upload dates could be signs of MIA developers and abandonware. Please be aware that not all the packages need a recent upload, especially when you consider non-software packages (e.g. artworks, sounds and so on). Even lintian does not produce any error when using old debhelper or policy versions (admitting the packages is fine with the new versions): http://lintian.debian.org/tags/ancient-standards-version.html http://lintian.debian.org/tags/package-uses-deprecated-debhelper-compat-version.html Thx, bye, Gismo / Luca pgpPuUauIUUsx.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: MBF: switching away from homepage pseudo-header
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 02:36:02PM +0100, Luca Capello wrote: That might also be a sign of packages lacking love, maybe some of them should be orphaned or dropped instead? I used the Missing homepage field in debian/control on the Blends tasks pages to enable some QA work which finally leaded to the effect that we now have all packages in Debian Med that in fact have a valid homepage (some packages do not have such thing any more) and in *all* cases the package needed some other polishing for some reasons. So using the Homepage field as some means to spot packages which are not maintained for some time seems to be a good idea and thus I would welcome the MBF effort. If it turns out that some bugs will be fixed by just dropping the package in question that's a reasonable thing to do as well. Please be aware that not all the packages need a recent upload, especially when you consider non-software packages (e.g. artworks, sounds and so on). Even lintian does not produce any error when using old debhelper or policy versions (admitting the packages is fine with the new versions): IMHO one upload per Debian release with a recent Standards-Version should be done for every package. It shows that the maintainer is active and continues to be interested in the package. Given that our release cycle is 1 year minimum this is a not too hard request. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110213165747.gc6...@an3as.eu
Re: MBF: switching away from homepage pseudo-header
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 12:23:46PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
PS lintian has a warning-level tag about that [2], which reports 250
packages vs 279 reported by my script. I'll check where the
differences come from before actually reporting the bugs.
Isn't the lintian warning enough? Or do we actually need the bugs for
some reason?
My recalling of how we've handled this large scale transitions in the
past (hello /usr/doc) is that lintian usually goes a long way to reach a
critical mass of the migration, but that at some point you need to be a
bit more pushy than that.
There are various ways of being more pushy, one can be to raise the
lintian report level to error, but I believe in this case an explicit
bug report could be more useful (beside also enabling maintainers to
mark the change as pending in $VCS). Finally, some packages might have
been uploaded before the lintian warning was introduced and the
maintainers might have honestly missed the message. A bug report will
fix that.
I agree with Cyril that packages affected by this might be neglected,
but I don't want to entangle the two QA efforts. Maybe, if we go for the
MBF and tag the bugs properly, the presence of this bug can be perused
by monitors like bapase [1] as extra data to identify neglected
packages?
Cheers.
[1] http://udd.debian.org/bapase.cgi
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Quando anche i santi ti voltano le spalle, | . |. I've fans everywhere
ti resta John Fante -- V. Capossela ...| ..: |.. -- C. Adams
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
