RFS: cover-thumbnailer/0.8.3-1
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package cover-thumbnailer * Package name: cover-thumbnailer Version : 0.8.3-1 Upstream Author : Fabien LOISON f...@flogisoft.com * URL : http://projects.flogisoft.com/cover-thumbnailer/ * License : GPLv3+ Section : gnome It builds those binary packages: cover-thumbnailer - Display covers in nautilus To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/cover-thumbnailer Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/cover-thumbnailer/cover-thumbnailer_0.8.3-1.dsc More information about cover-thumbnailer can be obtained from https://answers.launchpad.net/cover-thumbnailer Changes since the last upload: Nothing, this is the a RFS associated to ITP #667842 This version (0.8.3) introduce Nautilus 3.x support. Regards, cento -- cento -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1333794333.12990.12.camel@naboo
Bug#667902: RFS: downtimed/0.5-2
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package downtimed Package name: downtimed Version : 0.5-2 Upstream Author : Janne Snabb opensou...@epipe.com URL : http://dist.epipe.com/downtimed/ License : 2-clause BSD, i.e., FreeBSD Section : admin It builds those binary packages: downtimed - monitor of downtime, shutdown, and crashes Information about this package is available at http://mentors.debian.net/package/downtimed Download of the package using dget: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/downtimed/downtimed_0.5-2.dsc Changes since the last upload: * Corrections for GNU/Hurd * Use build flags, and hence build hardened. Best regards, Mats Erik Andersson, DM -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120407104230.ga10...@mea.homelinux.org
Bug#667903: RFS: rarpd/0.981107-8 [ITA] -- reverse address resolver
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package rarpd Package name: rarpd Version : 0.981107-8 Upstream Author : Alexey Kutznetsov, Jakub Jelinek URL : (extinct) License : GPL-2 Section : net It builds this binary package: rarpd - Reverse Address Resolution Protocol daemon Package information available at http://mentors.debian.net/package/rarpd Package download using dget: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/rarpd/rarpd_0.981107-8.dsc Changes since last upload: #627907: rarpd writes tons of 'recvfrom: Socket operation on non-socket' to syslog. #630612: package description #520268: ITA: rarpd Best regards, Mats Erik Andersson, DM -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120407111853.ga11...@mea.homelinux.org
Bug#667904: RFS: mitlm/0.4-1 [ITP] -- MIT Language Modeling toolkit
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package mitlm * Package name: mitlm Version : 0.4 Upstream Author : Bo-June (Paul) Hsu bo...@mit.edu * URL : http://code.google.com/p/mitlm/ * License : BSD Programming Lang: (C, C++, Fortran) Section : misc It builds those binary packages: libmitlm0 - MIT Language Modeling toolkit library libmitlm0-dbg - MIT Language Modeling toolkit debug symbols libmitlm0-dev - MIT Language Modeling toolkit development files mitlm - MIT Language Modeling toolkit To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/mitlm Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mitlm/mitlm_0.4-1.dsc Regards, Giulio Paci -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f80256d.2030...@gmail.com
Bug#667905: RFS: sptk/3.5-1 [ITP] -- speech signal processing toolkit
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package sptk * Package name: sptk Version : 3.5 Upstream Author : Keiichiro Oura ura...@nitech.ac.jp * URL : http://sp-tk.sourceforge.net/ * License : BSD Programming Lang: (C, tcsh) Section : misc It builds those binary packages: sptk - speech signal processing toolkit To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/sptk Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/contrib/s/sptk/sptk_3.5-1.dsc Regards, Giulio Paci -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f802625.50...@gmail.com
Bug#667902: RFS: downtimed/0.5-2
Hi, On 07.04.2012 12:42, Mats Erik Andersson wrote: downtimed - monitor of downtime, shutdown, and crashes this sounds quite interesting. I'll likely have a look at this at some point this weekend unless someone beats me on it or Sven finds time. -- with kind regards, Arno Töll IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Bug#659047: RFS: rpg - Readable Password Generator
On Sat, Apr 07, 2012 at 09:14:44AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: What about repagen i.e. REadable PAssword GENerator ? Is it OK.? That is nice. Good. But. There are too many things to be renamed: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=659047 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=652718 http://mentors.debian.net/package/rpg http://sourceforge.net/projects/rpg/ i.e. bugrports on sponsorship-requests and wnpp packages alone with projects on mentors and sourceforge sites. What is right way to do all this renaming? ecosystem. Consider for instance that if one day you suddenly can not contribute anymore, somebody else will need to care of the package. Summed together, even removals takes time. It would be a nice behavior, if maintainer leaving Debian will take care about removal his own package after some period of inactivity. In the future, Debian wants to set up a personal package archive system like in Ubuntu. That would be an ideal first stage for packages like yours, where they I don't like this idea. It take a lot of time to find needed software in such archive before including ppa into apt.sources. Most of users won't dig into such huge heap. It is better to use for this purpose dedicated, but still shared, united) archive. The http://mentors.debian.net/debian/ is good candidate. This said, it is good to pick a unique name in advance, and repagen I agree, naming is important problem not only for Debian packages, but at all in our life and technology. *** ### Vladimir Stavrinov ### vstavri...@gmail.com *** -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120407124633.GA2690@terra.00
Re: Bug#659047: RFS: rpg - Readable Password Generator
On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 9:46 AM, Vladimir Stavrinov vstavri...@gmail.com wrote: ecosystem. Consider for instance that if one day you suddenly can not contribute anymore, somebody else will need to care of the package. Summed together, even removals takes time. It would be a nice behavior, if maintainer leaving Debian will take care about removal his own package after some period of inactivity. It's not just about that. Every package that goes into the archive results in a non-trivial increase in the amount of work for some other teams (the release team, the security team, the FTP masters, possibly more), not only for the package maintainer. Also, removing packages isn't always the answer. There are specific criteria that lead into removals[1], and even then you can't force maintainers to request removals before they leave Debian. You seem to have an overly simplified view of how the distribution works. Now, about the package in question. The alternative software currently in the repositories is apg, which seems very popular[2]. In order to get your package sponsored, you'll need to address some concerns. First, If you're proposing a different algorithm for password generation, have you looked into contributing the algorithm to apg? If not, why? Writing software from scratch is very often not the right solution, so you need to be prepared to explain to prospective reviewers and sponsors why you took that route. When you are the one trying to get the package sponsored, saying give it a shot yourself to prospective sponsors doesn't inspire confidence and won't cut it. Second, wouldn't it be better to let the software mature first, then consider packaging it? Several people in this thread pointed out problems with the software, and although you're active trying to address them (successfully or not), it's clear that there are issues that need to be ironed out. If the minimal amount of testing done by prospective sponsors reveals such problems, you might want to take a step back, make sure people use and report bugs on the software, and eventually get back to packaging it when it's in better shape. debian-mentors isn't about developing software. The software must be in a good shape and well tested before it can be packaged, otherwise uploading the package doesn't do the distribution any good. [1]: http://wiki.debian.org/ftpmaster_Removals [2]: http://qa.debian.org/popcon-graph.php?packages=apg Regards, -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/canvyna9aowfat0u2tu5q8yha-ra1mtg0wz5pj5cud8gpkhg...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Bug#659047: RFS: rpg - Readable Password Generator
On Sat, Apr 07, 2012 at 01:13:35PM -0300, Fernando Lemos wrote: First, If you're proposing a different algorithm for password generation, have you looked into contributing the algorithm to apg? If not, why? Please also note that while apg generates secure passwords, rpg doesn't care about such things. It even uses $RANDOM as the entropy source. -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian packaging diagrams (was: Finding a mentor)
On Sat, Apr 07, 2012 at 09:15:20AM +1000, Aníbal Monsalve Salazar wrote: On Fri, Apr 06, 2012 at 02:26:30AM -0400, Kevin Mark wrote: On Fri, Apr 06, 2012 at 01:22:55AM -0400, Asheesh Laroia wrote: On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 11:29:47PM -0400, Kevin Mark wrote: I made this 2 diagram which might be helpful (or really confusing) about Debian: this shows some details about Debian packaging and some of the programs use for it http://mysite.verizon.net/kevin.mark/debian-package.png this shows the package movement from beginning to end http://mysite.verizon.net/kevin.mark/newdebian2.png These diagrams are great! Kevin, how did you make them? Uh, the 2nd one is with Dia, source available. I might have the source for the 1st which might be in Inkscape. I made them with much reading and many queries because I wanted to 'figure out how Debian worked'. And I like diagrams more than most folks. [ Moving this message to the mentors list] Can I have both sources, steps to produce the diagrams and their licences, please? http://mysite.verizon.net/kevin.mark/ that is where the diagrams live. The curent debian diagram is the one that has the Dia 'source' file. So I used Dia to produce it. Learning to use Dia, that is left as an exercise to the reader. I did have it translated by the help of various people and that was made possible by the fact that the dia format is a gziped text file. So you need to: gunzip the file open the file in a text editor replace English with $lang gzip the file open in Dia and make adjustments The other diagram about Debian Packages, I need to find the SVG file. But its much less complex to make. I was asked about the license, and I guess CC-BY would be what I would use. -- | .''`. == Debian GNU/Linux ==.| http://kevix.myopenid.com..| | : :' : The Universal OS| mysite.verizon.net/kevin.mark/.| | `. `' http://www.debian.org/.| http://counter.li.org [#238656]| |___`-Unless I ask to be CCd,.assume I am subscribed._| Don't let your mind wander -- it's too little to be let out alone. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120407180009.GB14755@horacrux
Bug#667974: RFS: libreoffice-converter/3.3.34.1+ds-3 [ITP]
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package libreoffice-converter * Package name: libreoffice-converter Version : 3.3.34.1+ds-3 Upstream Author : Petr Mladek pmla...@suse.cz Jan Holesovsky ke...@suse.cz * URL : https://build.opensuse.org/package/show?project=LibreOffice:Unstablepackage=libreoffice-converter * License : LGPL2.1+ Section : text It builds those binary packages: libreoffice-converter - Commandline Document Converter Using LibreOffice.org To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/libreoffice-converter Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libr/libreoffice-converter/libreoffice-converter_3.3.34.1+ds-3.dsc More information about hello can be obtained from https://build.opensuse.org/package/show?project=LibreOffice:Unstablepackage=libreoffice-converter In addition the packaging code can be found in: Vcs-Git: git://git.debian.org/collab-maint/libreoffice-converter.git Vcs-Browser: http://git.debian.org/?p=collab-maint/libreoffice-converter.git;a=summary Changes since the last upload: libreoffice-converter (3.3.34.1+ds-3) unstable; urgency=low * correct webpage in debian/control libreoffice-converter (3.3.34.1+ds-2) unstable; urgency=low * new upstream release 3.3.34.1 libreoffice-converter (3.3.32.1+ds-1) unstable; urgency=low * Initial release (Closes: 663273) * rules make. No Makefile. * enable Vcs fields. git repository in collab-maint Regards, Paul Elliott signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#667617: [Pkg-postgresql-public] Bug#667617: RFS: postgres-xc/0.9.6-1 [NEW] -- Write-scalable, synchronous multi-master, transparent PostgreSQL
On tor, 2012-04-05 at 15:32 +0400, Vladimir Stavrinov wrote: To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/postgres-xc You should probably fix the lintian warnings shown on that page first. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1333829454.26334.10.ca...@vanquo.pezone.net
Bug#667617: [Pkg-postgresql-public] Bug#667617: RFS: postgres-xc/0.9.6-1 [NEW] -- Write-scalable, synchronous multi-master, transparent PostgreSQL
On Sat, Apr 07, 2012 at 11:10:54PM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote: You should probably fix the lintian warnings shown on that page first. Yes, I will start packaging it from scratch with new version 0.9.7 *** ### Vladimir Stavrinov ### vstavri...@gmail.com *** -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120407201856.GA17799@terra.00
Re: Bug#659047: RFS: rpg - Readable Password Generator
On Sat, Apr 07, 2012 at 01:13:35PM -0300, Fernando Lemos wrote: maintainers to request removals before they leave Debian. You seem to have an overly simplified view of how the distribution works. You don't let me know something new. Now, about the package in question. The alternative software currently in the repositories is apg, which seems very popular[2]. In order to And I was among them using it for a long time a years before. And what? generation, have you looked into contributing the algorithm to apg? If I don't remember. It was few years ago. May be because it seemed easy enough quickly write a simple script. And it is the case: it is tiny and pretty short script. More over, at that time, I don't thought to introduce it into Debian. But for a last at least 15 years I've wrote tens of such scripts, that I am using for years in my work and life with enjoy and no problems. And now, I think, why don't make those lot of software available for Debian users? But I see: because there are army of formidable guards like You on the way into Debian. not, why? Writing software from scratch is very often not the right I am totally with You. That is me, who often repeat: as usual inventors of bikes create their machines with square wheels. But I hope, it is not my case, because I was using alternative, before start to write my own. trying to get the package sponsored, saying give it a shot yourself give it a shot yourself is only way in this case, because as Pronounceability is main point pushing me write this script, there are no way to evaluate and compare it other then on Your own experience. One thing, that I should add and not require give it a shot yourself, is that all symbols included in password and excluded combinations are configurable. That means that everybody can adjust Pronounceability on his own taste. Second, wouldn't it be better to let the software mature first, then consider packaging it? Several people in this thread pointed out Really? I am certainly agree with You, no doubt. But tell, me how much less mature software that one in question there are in Debian? No one, indeed? step back, make sure people use and report bugs on the software, and It is like paradox: may be with everything You write in this letter I am agree, but make different conclusions. Where are those people use and report bugs? If you means sourceforge, it take 100 years or more. I don't pretend on stable distribution. I think unstable or experimental is right place for testing and bugfixing. *** ### Vladimir Stavrinov ### vstavri...@gmail.com *** -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120407211001.GB2690@terra.00
Bug#667994: RFS: stl-manual/3.30-13 [ITA]
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal [important for RC bugs, wishlist for new packages] Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package stl-manual * Package name: stl-manual Version : 3.30-13 Upstream Author : SGI * URL : http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/ * License : Section : doc It builds those binary packages: stl-manual - C++-STL documentation in HTML To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/stl-manual Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/stl-manual/stl-manual_3.30-13.dsc Changes since the last upload: * Bump Standards-Version to 3.9.3 * ITA for #654555 Regards, cento -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1333839823.12990.32.camel@naboo
Re: Bug#659047: RFS: rpg - Readable Password Generator
Le Sat, Apr 07, 2012 at 04:46:33PM +0400, Vladimir Stavrinov a écrit : http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=659047 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=652718 http://mentors.debian.net/package/rpg Hi, There is no need to rename bugs and mentors uploads retroactively. If repagen is accepted in Debian, it will close #652718 and #659047, and this is enough to make the link. The mentors URL (in my understanding) will not persist. This said, for your information, you can easily retitle bugs from the command line with the bts program in the devscripts package. http://sourceforge.net/projects/rpg/ There can be discrepancies between Debian's package name and the upstream name. For instance, I packaged the program last in the package last-align. Conversly, I packaged the program bwa in the package bwa, but on SourceForge (and only there) it is called bio-bwa. As a side note, I think that the comments about security in this thread are very relevant. If your package were accepted in Debian, it would need to meet Debian's and Debian's users expectations, not only your vision as an upstream developer. This means that if some design choices are perceived as flaws from Debian's point of view, somebody will have to do some work to correct the package in Sid and perhaps in Stable. That is one of the reasons for the reluctance to accept your package. Have a nice Sunday, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120408000525.ga24...@falafel.plessy.net
Making packages available to Debian users (was: Bug#659047: RFS: rpg - Readable Password Generator)
Vladimir Stavrinov vstavri...@gmail.com writes: But for a last at least 15 years I've wrote tens of such scripts, that I am using for years in my work and life with enjoy and no problems. And now, I think, why don't make those lot of software available for Debian users? But I see: because there are army of formidable guards like You on the way into Debian. You are receiving criticism and resistance because your proposal is to put these packages *in Debian*. There is, for very good reasons, a barrier to entry there: Debian should be a coherent operating system composed of parts working well together. It should not be a bag of arbitrary packages. Just because someone likes a work is not sufficient reason to put it in Debian. You express the desire to “make those [works] available for Debian users”, and imply that the right way to do this is to submit the packages for inclusion in Debian. That's far from true. Instead, you should make these works available to people as Debian packages, but not argue for their inclusion *in* Debian until they have demonstrated a track record of being useful to numerous Debian users and that they can continue to be maintained in the face of bug reports and requests for improvement. Please don't attempt to do an end-run around that by arguing for their inclusion in Debian because you, alone so far, find them attractive. That's getting it backward. Instead, maintain them as publicly-available works, ensure their maintenance as distinct useful packages, and only then advocate for their inclusion in Debian. -- \ “I wish there was a knob on the TV to turn up the intelligence. | `\ There's a knob called ‘brightness’ but it doesn't work.” | _o__) —Eugene P. Gallagher | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/877gxrhyqf.fsf...@benfinney.id.au
Re: Bug#659047: RFS: rpg - Readable Password Generator
On Sun, Apr 08, 2012 at 09:05:25AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: As a side note, I think that the comments about security in this thread are very relevant. If your package were accepted in Debian, it would need to meet Debian's and Debian's users expectations, not only your vision as an upstream developer. This means that if some design choices are perceived as flaws from Debian's point of view, somebody will have to do some work to correct the package in Sid and perhaps in Stable. That is one of the reasons for the reluctance to accept your package. As You can see from my comments, I have no objection against security concern. But the main discussion raised not from security, but about question, what for do You write software of the same designation that one already exists in Debian. As for security, I hope there are no such problems in last uploaded version. *** ### Vladimir Stavrinov ### vstavri...@gmail.com *** -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120408002419.GD2690@terra.00
Re: Making packages available to Debian users (was: Bug#659047: RFS: rpg - Readable Password Generator)
On Sun, Apr 08, 2012 at 10:08:08AM +1000, Ben Finney wrote: barrier to entry there: Debian should be a coherent operating system Very good. But to keep system in coherent state You should not only build barrier on entry, but also remove packages that break such coherence. And this should be not only orphaned packages. I am using Debian for more then 10 years and know, it is big enough to include lot of garbage. So I don't understand, why do You think my package is worse of those garbage and how it break coherence. Instead, you should make these works available to people as Debian packages, but not argue for their inclusion *in* Debian until they have demonstrated a track record of being useful to numerous Debian users and What You mean? How to do this? And were this track record will be seen? It is already available as Debian packages on sourceforge. And what further? numerous Debian users will seek it there? It sound like demagogy. That's getting it backward. Instead, maintain them as publicly-available works, ensure their maintenance as distinct useful packages, and only then advocate for their inclusion in Debian. Hey, what do You talking about? I don't sell You elephant or space shuttle. It is only tiny shell script as simple as toy. This way You can kill any desire to join Debian. I begin understand something. I remember, few Years ago one Japanese employer refuse accept me for only one reason, because I like Debian too much. *** ### Vladimir Stavrinov ### vstavri...@gmail.com *** -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120408012812.GE2690@terra.00
Re: Making packages available to Debian users
No need to send copies to me of messages that you're also sending to this forum. Vladimir Stavrinov vstavri...@gmail.com writes: So I don't understand, why do You think my package is worse of those garbage and how it break coherence. I don't have a position one way or another on whether any of your packages is worse than others. I'm saying you are receiving resistance because “I want more users of this package” is not a good enough reason for it to be in Debian. Instead, you should make these works available to people as Debian packages, but not argue for their inclusion *in* Debian until they have demonstrated a track record of being useful to numerous Debian users and What You mean? How to do this? And were this track record will be seen? It is already available as Debian packages on sourceforge. Great! Please promote your works and build up a community of users, maintain the packages there, and let's see how well they survive. When there is a sufficient user base and a clear need for a package to be *in* Debian, at that time it will make sense to propose it for inclusion. And what further? numerous Debian users will seek it there? It sound like demagogy. How you promote your packages is up to you. But promotion of your packages is not sufficient reason to propose inclusing them in Debian. And that is why you're receiving resistance to these proposals. -- \ “The Things to do are: the things that need doing, that you see | `\ need to be done, and that no one else seems to see need to be | _o__) done.” —Richard Buckminster Fuller, 1970-02-16 | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87398fhu38@benfinney.id.au
Re: Making packages available to Debian users
On Sun, Apr 08, 2012 at 11:48:27AM +1000, Ben Finney wrote: No need to send copies to me of messages that you're also sending to this forum. Sorry, it was my fault: first I send it to You instead of list, then notice this and send it to list. So I don't understand, why do You think my package is worse of those garbage and how it break coherence. I don't have a position one way or another on whether any of your packages is worse than others. I'm saying you are receiving resistance OK, but what about garbage? To be consistent, You should clean up it. Are You doing so? Great! Please promote your works and build up a community of users, maintain the packages there, and let's see how well they survive. When there is a sufficient user base and a clear need for a package to be *in* Debian, at that time it will make sense to propose it for inclusion. OK. You was very convincing to make sure my modest script will never included into Debian. It is not place for it. As result Debian will be coherent and somebody get gain from this. *** ### Vladimir Stavrinov ### vstavri...@gmail.com *** -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120408022049.GG2690@terra.00
Re: Making packages available to Debian users (was: Bug#659047: RFS: rpg - Readable Password Generator)
On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 10:28 PM, Vladimir Stavrinov vstavri...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Apr 08, 2012 at 10:08:08AM +1000, Ben Finney wrote: barrier to entry there: Debian should be a coherent operating system Very good. But to keep system in coherent state You should not only build barrier on entry, but also remove packages that break such coherence. And this should be not only orphaned packages. I am using Debian for more then 10 years and know, it is big enough to include lot of garbage. As I understand it, being orphaned is not a required condition for removal, but rather an argument for removal[1]. You may believe we should consider removals more often, and that would be a valid concern, but it's not what is being discussed here. So I don't understand, why do You think my package is worse of those garbage and how it break coherence. That's nonsense. Once a package enters the archive, it's not trivial to get rid of it. It's thus reasonable that we want to make sure packages are in good shape for entry in Debian. It's also natural that we want to improve the quality of the distributed software over time. We have higher standards for packages entering the archive now, and that's great for the distribution. Instead, you should make these works available to people as Debian packages, but not argue for their inclusion *in* Debian until they have demonstrated a track record of being useful to numerous Debian users and What You mean? How to do this? And were this track record will be seen? It is already available as Debian packages on sourceforge. And what further? numerous Debian users will seek it there? It sound like demagogy. You don't need to package a software outside Debian as a precondition for inclusion in Debian. I think what Ben means is that Debian shouldn't be treated as a simple distribution channel. Remember that packaging for Debian is a way to contribute to Debian and its community. Although it brings exposure to the upstream projects as a side-effect, packaging for Debian is an end in itself. Please note I don't mean to infer the reasoning behind your desire to contribute to Debian. That's getting it backward. Instead, maintain them as publicly-available works, ensure their maintenance as distinct useful packages, and only then advocate for their inclusion in Debian. Hey, what do You talking about? I don't sell You elephant or space shuttle. It is only tiny shell script as simple as toy. As we already mentioned in the original thread, every single package uploaded to the archive brings a maintenance overhead that is not directly linked to the package maintainer. By comparing your package to a toy, you're grossly simplifying the consequences of the inclusion of a package that may not be fit for Debian. This way You can kill any desire to join Debian. I begin understand something. I remember, few Years ago one Japanese employer refuse accept me for only one reason, because I like Debian too much. Nobody here intends to discourage contribution. The review process is part of improving the quality of the packages we ship. Understanding and accepting that is key to getting your package sponsored. If your package doesn't adhere to our quality standards, it probably shouldn't be uploaded. I understand your frustration, but there's no way around the review process. [1]: http://ftp-master.debian.org/removals.html Regards, -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/canvyna_kko59bdfz1_gwuzhblvfpsxzbd5urvfzqsbpkpda...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Making packages available to Debian users
On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 11:20 PM, Vladimir Stavrinov vstavri...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Apr 08, 2012 at 11:48:27AM +1000, Ben Finney wrote: So I don't understand, why do You think my package is worse of those garbage and how it break coherence. I don't have a position one way or another on whether any of your packages is worse than others. I'm saying you are receiving resistance OK, but what about garbage? To be consistent, You should clean up it. Are You doing so? The fact that we right now may be shipping packages in bad shape (or whatever you call garbage) is no excuse to accept more packages in bad shape. Please accept the criticism you may receive, the review process won't go away. Regards, -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/canvyna9iaxkyjt9st0359zlqaa+gfrpo-jwsereibnrf5bo...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Making packages available to Debian users (was: Bug#659047: RFS: rpg - Readable Password Generator)
On Sat, Apr 07, 2012 at 11:20:55PM -0300, Fernando Lemos wrote: to get rid of it. It's thus reasonable that we want to make sure packages are in good shape for entry in Debian. It's also natural that It is very easy to execute this task: please, read this shell script. It is short and simple enough for this. It take time much less then all our discussion here. be uploaded. I understand your frustration, but there's no way around the review process. The problem is that I don't see this review process here. Instead, all of You are explaining what Debian is and what is not. But I've got no much new. You are trying to breach into opened door. But point is that all this discussion have no relation to script in question. *** ### Vladimir Stavrinov ### vstavri...@gmail.com *** -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120408025808.GH2690@terra.00
Re: Bug#659047: RFS: rpg - Readable Password Generator
Vladimir Stavrinov vstavri...@gmail.com writes: The problem is that I don't see this review process here. Instead, all of You are explaining what Debian is and what is not. But I've got no much new. You are trying to breach into opened door. But point is that all this discussion have no relation to script in question. As indicated by the change of subject, this is not talking about a single package. We are now responding to your position of using Debian's mentors resource as a place to put arbitrary packages for people to find. For example, earlier in this thread you satated: Vladimir Stavrinov vstavri...@gmail.com writes: It take a lot of time to find needed software in [personal package archives] before including ppa into apt.sources. Most of users won't dig into such huge heap. It is better to use for this purpose dedicated, but still shared, united) archive. The http://mentors.debian.net/debian/ is good candidate. I hope you now have a better understanding why Debian, and the Debian mentors resource, is not suitable for what you're saying here. -- \ “Yesterday I parked my car in a tow-away zone. When I came back | `\ the entire area was missing.” —Steven Wright | _o__) | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87y5q6hoev@benfinney.id.au
