Re: Two years later and still no netatalk3 in jessie?
On Sun, 9 Nov 2014 17:20:42 +0100 Adrian Knoth wrote: > 2012/10/11 - Hideki started working on a 3.0.1 package using dh style > instead of cdbs, but it was declined because of Jonas' wish to stick > with cdbs I'm sorry, if I was familiar with cdbs, its result would be changed... ;) > But maybe, just maybe, at some point the maintainers should actually > upload stuff? Let's put it into jessie-backports since backports is enabled by default in Jessie :) -- Regards, Hideki Yamane henrich @ debian.or.jp/org http://wiki.debian.org/HidekiYamane -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141110225636.14b3505724d825826dcdd...@debian.or.jp
Re: Two years later and still no netatalk3 in jessie?
On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 12:55:03PM +0100, Bálint Réczey wrote: > >> 2014/8/4 - Adrian updated the package to 3.1.3 > >> adi's package (currently @ 3.1.3): > >> https://github.com/adiknoth/netatalk-debian [..] > > I'd say get some devs behind this, call the package netatalk3 and ship > > it in parallel. I had it running for months, upstream had worked on it > > for years, it's not that this is bleeding edge or untested. > IMHO the proper way of putting this package into focus is asking the > maintainers to file an RFH bug if you don't want help yourself. > Helping yourself can be submitting patches through BTS, You surely have noticed that I actually provided proper Debian packaging in January 2014, right? And proper means 3.0/quilt workflow with signed tags, pristine-tar and everything. I've pinged the maintainers/bug: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=690227#65 I've updated the package in early August, pinged the bug plus the team mailinglist: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=690227#81 I've updated it a second time to 3.1.6 in late September. I think it's only fair to say that *I* actually did help. Read this timeline: From: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=685878#16 2012/7/9 - netatalk 3.0 released upstream 2012/10/11 - Hideki started working on a 3.0.1 package using dh style instead of cdbs, but it was declined because of Jonas' wish to stick with cdbs 2013/3/18 - Igor posted a 3.0.1 cdbs package 2013/4/12 - Martin updated the cdbs package to 3.0.3 2014/1/11 - Tony built a 3.0.6 deb 2014/1/11 - Tony articulated the need for 3.0.6 due to problems w. time machine 2014/1/11 - Jonas stated intent to upgrade to 3.x but cited lack of time 2014/1/14 - Adrian cleaned up tony's 3.0.6 package and posted it 2014/2/10 - Jonas stated intent to continue to maintain the netatalk package & opened a mailing list on alioth 2014/4/18 - Brian cleaned up & updated Adrian's package to 3.1.1 2014/4/19 - Chris suggested to get netatalk 3.x into experimental asap to get it ready for jessie 2014/4/20 - Chris, Brian & Jonas collaborated & pushed 2.2.5 2014/8/4 - Adrian updated the package to 3.1.3 2014/8/27 - HAT reported that 3.1.6 is available 2014/9/29 - Adrian updated the package to 3.1.6 Add at least three wishlist bugs asking for netatalk 3.x, some as early as 2012. Two years of absolutely no progress, despite at least six people helping. I'm only a DM, I cannot upload foreign packages. And if it wasn't for the two friends who needed netatalk3, I wouldn't even care at all. But maybe, just maybe, at some point the maintainers should actually upload stuff? > Most probably Jessie will not contain netatalk 3, but having it in > jessie-backports would be almost as good as having it in jessie. I agree. So is there a DD who actually cares about netatalk? If so, clone my git repo and upload to experimental as suggested seven months ago. The usual git-buildpackage workflow. Or call it netatalk3 and upload it to sid, totally up to you. Or file a RFH bug on behalf of the netatalk maintainers that can be ignored for another two years. ;) Cheers PS: Just in case it wasn't obvious, I have absolutely no interest in maintaining netatalk. Not my package. -- mail: a...@thur.de http://adi.thur.de PGP/GPG: key via keyserver -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141109162042.gi11...@ltw.loris.tv
Re: Two years later and still no netatalk3 in jessie?
On Sun, 09 Nov 2014 12:32:37 + "Adam D. Barratt" wrote: > > jessie without netatalk3 would be embarrassing at best, > > Well, as you noted, we've frozen. And there are no netatalk packages > in the archive _anywhere_. So Jessie won't have them. s/netatalk/netatalk3/ ? netatalk 2.2.5 is in sid and wheezy but has an RC bug #751121, so did not migrate. So there'll be no netatalk package in Jessie, not 2.25 and not 3.* -- Neil Williams = http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/ pgpPl2AiIYVjj.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Two years later and still no netatalk3 in jessie?
On 2014-11-09 12:32, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On 2014-11-09 9:48, Adrian Knoth wrote: [...] jessie without netatalk3 would be embarrassing at best, Well, as you noted, we've frozen. And there are no netatalk packages in the archive _anywhere_. So Jessie won't have them. Pretend I didn't lose a "3" there. :( -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/6f9cf3f4bb363529c8b48e743af22...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: Two years later and still no netatalk3 in jessie?
On 2014-11-09 9:48, Adrian Knoth wrote: On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 01:21:04PM -0400, Igor Bernstein wrote: - jessie freeze happens in 2 months Happened in the meantime :-/ [...] I'd say get some devs behind this, call the package netatalk3 and ship it in parallel. I had it running for months, upstream had worked on it for years, it's not that this is bleeding edge or untested. Saying "people should do something" will not work. jessie without netatalk3 would be embarrassing at best, Well, as you noted, we've frozen. And there are no netatalk packages in the archive _anywhere_. So Jessie won't have them. CC debian-devel for additional momentum. Momentum for what? If you mean "to get it in to Jessie", then there is no need for momentum. It's not going to happen. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/cde9230718a2c3af50f5b523bfb2c...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: Two years later and still no netatalk3 in jessie?
Hi Adrian, 2014-11-09 10:48 GMT+01:00 Adrian Knoth : > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 01:21:04PM -0400, Igor Bernstein wrote: > >> - jessie freeze happens in 2 months > > Happened in the meantime :-/ > >> 2014/8/4 - Adrian updated the package to 3.1.3 >> adi's package (currently @ 3.1.3): >> https://github.com/adiknoth/netatalk-debian > > JFTR, I'm at 3.1.6. > > > The whole situation reminds me of wine, where Debian shipped the same > outdated version for multiple releases. > > Even downstream distributions are suffering: > > > http://raspberrypi.stackexchange.com/questions/23985/why-is-netatalk-not-updated > > > I'd say get some devs behind this, call the package netatalk3 and ship > it in parallel. I had it running for months, upstream had worked on it > for years, it's not that this is bleeding edge or untested. IMHO the proper way of putting this package into focus is asking the maintainers to file an RFH bug if you don't want help yourself. Helping yourself can be submitting patches through BTS, packaging the new version and uploading it to mentors.debian.net or even hiring someone to do it for you. > > jessie without netatalk3 would be embarrassing at best, but more > importantly, it would be frustrating for everyone who wants to use their > Linux file servers as a time machine backup. Most probably Jessie will not contain netatalk 3, but having it in jessie-backports would be almost as good as having it in jessie. > > CC debian-devel for additional momentum. Please stop CCing this bug in > case this turns into another bike shedding discussions on the ML. Please try the RFH [1] way instead of CC-ing debian-devel. Packages/bugs needing more attention is business as usual and the RFH way is the standard procedure for dealing with it. While the procedure for ensuring better care for our packages (filing RFH, RFA, O bugs) do exist, we, maintainers are not proactive enough using the procedures. If you are a fellow DD/DM/sponsored uploader, please take a look at the packages BTS lists under your name and think for a moment if the package needs help or a new maintainer. Cheers, Balint [1]https://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/#l2 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CAK0OdpxrJr+MNTkJKDu0stoUC3LEeZP6J2m=bofc00fcnxu...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Two years later and still no netatalk3 in jessie?
On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 10:48:58AM +0100, Adrian Knoth wrote: > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 01:21:04PM -0400, Igor Bernstein wrote: > > > - jessie freeze happens in 2 months > > Happened in the meantime :-/ Well, what is the point in CCing -devel then? If you were trying to set a roadmap for jessie+1, that wasn't very clear from your post I think. Michael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141109100801.gc14...@raptor.chemicalconnection.dyndns.org
