Re: RFC: graph of Debian package cycle
martin f krafft dijo [Sat, Feb 12, 2005 at 04:47:27PM +0100]: > Based on the work of Kevin Mark (URL not available, sorry), I have > made a graph of the life cycle of a Debian package for inclusion in > my forthcoming book (http://debianbook.info). You can find the > sources and generated files at > > http://people.debian.org/~madduck/graphs/package-cycle/en/ Good! I do hope to be soon near a graphics-capable display ;-) I have always liked this stuff. > PS: right now it's really big in size. Sorry about that. If someone > tells me how to reliably scale a dia diagram down, I will do so, > gladly. I do it this way: dia -nt png -s800 diagram.dia This will output a 800 pixel wide diagram. Of course, this will be only as reliable as the selected resolution allows. Greetings, -- Gunnar Wolf - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - (+52-55)1451-2244 / 5554-9450 PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23 Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973 F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFC: graph of Debian package cycle
also sprach Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.02.12.1908 +0100]: > Interesting, thanks. I believe the --->O arrays are confusingly > labled. "package installation" is probably a better choice. The > difference between "package propagation" and "package upload" is > not clear, at least to me. okay for the first. the difference between propagation and upload is whether it happens automatically by the archive scripts, or has to be manually instigated by the developer (uploaded). do you have a suggestion how to improve this? > I suppose you should split the diagram in two because the > before-incoming part and the after-incoming part are not too > strongly connected, and the result would be more readable. well, i guess you are somewhat right, although the split will be difficult. i guess just leaving out the incoming part altogether at the risk of not being absolutely correct may be an option. anyway, i am tempted to leave it as complex as it is and to add a note that it's not supposed to be any more overwhelming than reality is. :) upon careful study, the graph *can* be used to extract information, no? also sprach Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.02.13.1031 +0100]: > > I suppose you should split the diagram in two because the > > before-incoming part and the after-incoming part are not too > > strongly connected, and the result would be more readable. > > This is something about which I will think. Yes, me too. If you have any suggestions on how to split, I would love to hear them. Kevin: I hope I did not step on your feet, but I was in a rush to get some version done, so I did not contact you. You are cordially invited to work from my sources, or we can maintain in parallel. In any case, I hope you are okay with the attribution I gave. Otherwise, please let me know. also sprach Otavio Salvador <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.02.12.1947 +0100]: > mfk> Given that incoming contains the source package (unless orig.tar.gz > mfk> is pulled from unstable, should add that), the buildds really don't > mfk> deal with the upstream sources or the unpacked source tree > mfk> maintained by the developer. > > Buildds deal with source package and not binary package. I thought > you mean with package source the .dsc, .diff.gz and .orig.tar.gz > files. Right, and incoming also contains them. The "sources" item is really supposed to be the upstream sources or the directory on the developer's machine holding the stuff, but inaccessible as such to the buildds. -- Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list! .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' :proud Debian developer, admin, user, and author `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system Invalid/expired PGP subkeys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver! signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: RFC: graph of Debian package cycle
On Sat, Feb 12, 2005 at 07:08:49PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > * martin f. krafft: > > > Based on the work of Kevin Mark (URL not available, sorry), I have > > made a graph of the life cycle of a Debian package for inclusion in > > my forthcoming book (http://debianbook.info). You can find the > > sources and generated files at > > > > http://people.debian.org/~madduck/graphs/package-cycle/en/ > > Interesting, thanks. I believe the --->O arrays are confusingly > labled. "package installation" is probably a better choice. The > difference between "package propagation" and "package upload" is not > clear, at least to me. Hi Florian, I think 'package propagation' is machine initiated (via tags) and 'package upload' is human initiated. > > I suppose you should split the diagram in two because the > before-incoming part and the after-incoming part are not too strongly > connected, and the result would be more readable. > This is something about which I will think. -Kev -- counter.li.org #238656 -- goto counter.li.org and be counted! (__) (oo) /--\/ / ||| * /\---/\ ~~ ~~ "Have you mooed today?"... signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: RFC: graph of Debian package cycle
Hi Martin, On Sat, Feb 12, 2005 at 04:47:27PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: > Based on the work of Kevin Mark (URL not available, sorry), I have http://kmark.home.pipeline.com/debian.png http://kmark.home.pipeline.com/debian.fig > made a graph of the life cycle of a Debian package for inclusion in > my forthcoming book (http://debianbook.info). You can find the > sources and generated files at > > http://people.debian.org/~madduck/graphs/package-cycle/en/ > > Additional information is available at > > http://people.debian.org/~madduck/graphs/package-cycle/ABOUT > > The graph is herewith released under the Artistic Licence. Thanks > to Goswin Brederlow, Bernhard Link, and Kenshi Muto, as well as > Kevin Mark, Sven Müller, and Martin Schulze for the original work. > > Please send any comments or corrections my way. hmm! I think I will try to update mine! cheers, -Kev -- counter.li.org #238656 -- goto counter.li.org and be counted! (__) (oo) /--\/ / ||| * /\---/\ ~~ ~~ "Have you mooed today?"... signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: RFC: graph of Debian package cycle
|| On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 18:50:56 +0100 || martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: mfk> also sprach Otavio Salvador <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.02.12.1842 +0100]: >> I think you might change this: >> >> incoming -> package source -> buildds -> package upload -> incoming mfk> Given that incoming contains the source package (unless orig.tar.gz mfk> is pulled from unstable, should add that), the buildds really don't mfk> deal with the upstream sources or the unpacked source tree mfk> maintained by the developer. Buildds deal with source package and not binary package. I thought you mean with package source the .dsc, .diff.gz and .orig.tar.gz files. -- O T A V I OS A L V A D O R - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] UIN: 5906116 GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855 Home Page: http://www.freedom.ind.br/otavio - "Microsoft gives you Windows ... Linux gives you the whole house." pgpa4L4snPN4h.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFC: graph of Debian package cycle
* martin f. krafft: > Based on the work of Kevin Mark (URL not available, sorry), I have > made a graph of the life cycle of a Debian package for inclusion in > my forthcoming book (http://debianbook.info). You can find the > sources and generated files at > > http://people.debian.org/~madduck/graphs/package-cycle/en/ Interesting, thanks. I believe the --->O arrays are confusingly labled. "package installation" is probably a better choice. The difference between "package propagation" and "package upload" is not clear, at least to me. I suppose you should split the diagram in two because the before-incoming part and the after-incoming part are not too strongly connected, and the result would be more readable. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFC: graph of Debian package cycle
also sprach Otavio Salvador <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.02.12.1842 +0100]: > I think you might change this: > > incoming -> package source -> buildds -> package upload -> incoming Given that incoming contains the source package (unless orig.tar.gz is pulled from unstable, should add that), the buildds really don't deal with the upstream sources or the unpacked source tree maintained by the developer. I am not sure what you mean. Sorry. -- Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list! .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' :proud Debian developer, admin, user, and author `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system Invalid/expired PGP subkeys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver! signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: RFC: graph of Debian package cycle
|| On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 16:47:27 +0100 || martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: mfk> Based on the work of Kevin Mark (URL not available, sorry), I have mfk> made a graph of the life cycle of a Debian package for inclusion in mfk> my forthcoming book (http://debianbook.info). You can find the mfk> sources and generated files at I think you might change this: incoming -> package source -> buildds -> package upload -> incoming -- O T A V I OS A L V A D O R - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] UIN: 5906116 GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855 Home Page: http://www.freedom.ind.br/otavio - "Microsoft gives you Windows ... Linux gives you the whole house." pgpSFmbwBoAcE.pgp Description: PGP signature
RFC: graph of Debian package cycle
Based on the work of Kevin Mark (URL not available, sorry), I have made a graph of the life cycle of a Debian package for inclusion in my forthcoming book (http://debianbook.info). You can find the sources and generated files at http://people.debian.org/~madduck/graphs/package-cycle/en/ Additional information is available at http://people.debian.org/~madduck/graphs/package-cycle/ABOUT The graph is herewith released under the Artistic Licence. Thanks to Goswin Brederlow, Bernhard Link, and Kenshi Muto, as well as Kevin Mark, Sven Müller, and Martin Schulze for the original work. Please send any comments or corrections my way. PS: right now it's really big in size. Sorry about that. If someone tells me how to reliably scale a dia diagram down, I will do so, gladly. -- Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list! .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' :proud Debian developer, admin, user, and author `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system Invalid/expired PGP subkeys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver! signature.asc Description: Digital signature
