RE: Mentor requested
Subject: Re: Mentor requested From: p...@debian.org To: rwob...@hotmail.com Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2014 17:37:42 +0800 Firstly, please respond on the list in future. On Sat, 2014-02-01 at 09:20 +, Roelof Wobben wrote: I already send a mail to the Gnome team that I want to join it a few days ago, But still no repons back if they have accepted me. The main thing is whether or not you are doing work, not being in a team. As I said in my mail you can start doing that now, without being in the team at all. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise Oke, With Eriberto as my mentor I will pratice in packaging.And as I said I will read the bug triage page and will look what I can do there. Roelof
Bug#733578: hwinfo/21.0-1 needs updates / FTBFS of libx86emu
On 29/01/14 02:34, Sebastien Badia wrote: On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 02:46:33AM (+0100), Johann Felix Soden wrote: Hi Sebastien, hi Tomasz, I have not yet completely reviewed hwinfo 21.0-1, but there is at least one thing which needs to be fixed: Hi Johann, Hi Seb, Hi Johann, Thanks for your time and this review! - debian/libhd21.symbols is incomplete on i386. A fixed version is attached. And I found trailing whitespaces in old debian/changelog entries and debian/libhd-doc.doc-base. The master branch is up-to-date according your comments, thanks ! Yes, Sebastien did a great job recently on hwinfo. :) Since related, here some comments about libx86emu: At the moment, it FTBFS on some architectures [mips, mipsel, powerpc, ...] because of missing sys/io.h. As the new hwinfo depends on it, this restricts the architectures where it will be available. So this should be fixed before hwinfo is uploaded - for example by fixing libx86emu itself or by reducing the dependency to the architectures where it is really available. Hum, and it's not a missing dependency to libc6-dev ? (I'm maybe wrong) Yeah, seems to me as well. I'll try to test it out. Actually, the libx86 package contains a copy of libx86emu and has therefore similar problems [1,2]. Please contact Anibal Monsalve Salazar (ani...@debian.org) who maintains it. Especially for the security team, it would be nice, if it could use the new libx86emu package instead of including its own copy. Contacted :-) Actually, we discussed this with Anibal and developer of lix86emu packaged by us (Steffen Winterfeldt) some time ago. libx86emu is not a *copy*, but a *fork* and a quite diverging one, for that matter. The relevant copy of the discussion: (...) I'm seriously confused what libx86emu really is. I found 3 possibilities: (1) libx86emu here https://gitorious.org/x86emu/ (2) libx86emu in xorg-server: http://sources.debian.net/src/xorg-server/2:1.14.3-5/hw/xfree86/x86emu (3) libx86emu in libx86 The first commit in git history of (1) is taken directly from version 0.99-1 of (3) in Debian. Then, I think, it started to diverge to the point that it is far from being compatible. http://www.codon.org.uk/~mjg59/libx86/ mentions that libx86emu is now maintained as part of the X.org distribution. and What needs to be done? Update lrmi to the latest code. Therefore it seems to me that we have the following provenance tree (time goes to the right): libx86emu in Xorg current version in Xorg | | | | libx86 (version from 2006, but -*- current version in Debian (1.1) probably merged with Xorg| version two times) | | | | gitorious libx86emu branched from version 0.99-1 version 1.4 in Debian (may have been merged ocasionally with upstreams, can't tell) Thanks a lot, Seb -- Sebastien Badia Cheers, Tomasz -- 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/20140201122851.ga22...@buchert.pl
Re: Bug#717995: marked as done (RFS: rawdog/2.18-1 [ITA])
ow...@bugs.debian.org (Debian Bug Tracking System) writes: (closing http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=717995 because my rawdog package has been on mentors for 20 weeks) This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. Well, no, it hasn't. I'd still like to adopt the package, but I'm stuck at trying to find a mentor -- I've had helpful technical advice from several people but no interest in actually uploading the package (which has no outstanding problems as far as I'm aware). Is there anything further I can do at this point? It seems a shame to throw away the work that I've put into updating the package. Thanks, -- Adam Sampson a...@offog.org http://offog.org/ -- 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/y2azjmb8245@cartman.at.offog.org
Re: Bug#717995: marked as done (RFS: rawdog/2.18-1 [ITA])
On Sat, Feb 01, 2014 at 12:10:50PM +, Adam Sampson wrote: ow...@bugs.debian.org (Debian Bug Tracking System) writes: (closing http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=717995 because my rawdog package has been on mentors for 20 weeks) This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. Well, no, it hasn't. I agree that the problem has been dealt with was not the reason for closing this bug. I'd still like to adopt the package, but I'm stuck at trying to find a mentor -- I've had helpful technical advice from several people but no interest in actually uploading the package (which has no outstanding problems as far as I'm aware). Is there anything further I can do at this point? Yes, possible approaches : 1. Keep uploading to mentors and reopening the bug 2. Debate the automatic removal from mentors - maybe the time should be longer - maybe the time should depend on activity on the RFS or elsewhere 3. Upload to elsewhere and reopen the bug once mentiong where the package is It seems a shame to throw away the work that I've put into updating the package. You're absolutely right on that. Regards, Bart Martens -- 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/20140201130656.gb30...@master.debian.org
Bug#736988: marked as done (RFS: freehep-graphics2d/2.1.1-4)
Your message dated Sat, 1 Feb 2014 15:42:45 +0100 with message-id 20140201144245.GA9640@jessie01 and subject line Re: Bug#736988: RFS: freehep-graphics2d/2.1.1-4 has caused the Debian Bug report #736988, regarding RFS: freehep-graphics2d/2.1.1-4 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 736988: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=736988 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package freehep-graphics2d * Package name: freehep-graphics2d Version : 2.1.1-4 Upstream Author : CERN, Geneva, Switzerland SLAC, Stanford, California, U.S.A. University of California Santa Cruz, U.S.A. * URL : http://java.freehep.org/ * License : LGPL-2.1+ Section : java It builds those binary packages: libfreehep-graphics2d-java - FreeHEP 2D Graphics Library To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/freehep-graphics2d Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/f/freehep-graphics2d/freehep-graphics2d_2.1.1-4.dsc Public git repo at: http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-java/freehep/freehep-graphics2d.git Changes since the last upload: [ Giovanni Mascellani ] * Added real watch file * Fixed my email address. [ Gabriele Giacone ] * Added patch from sweethome3d upstream to fix SVG export (Closes: #657700) * Switch to 3.0 (quilt) format. * Make VCS-* fields canonical. * Bump Standards-Version to 3.9.5 (no changes). * Remove needless Depends on jre. * Fix d/copyright according to format specification 1.0. * Add missing classpath. + Add javahelper to B-D. I'd want to fix SVG export on sweethome3d (#657700). DM grant to stop nagging sponsors would be really appreciated too. Regards, Gabriele Giacone ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 01:47:39AM +0100, Gabriele Giacone wrote: DM grant to stop nagging sponsors would be really appreciated too. Got DM grant from gio, closing.---End Message---
RE: Mentor requested
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2014 07:35:36 +0800 Subject: Re: Mentor requested From: p...@debian.org To: debian-mentors@lists.debian.org On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 12:23 AM, Roelof Wobben wrote: I really want to learn the debian way of packaging. I have read the manual and did the packaging tutorial. That is a good start. The next step is to start working in the Debian GNOME team. Have a look at their wiki page for how to get involved with the team and how their team works. https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DebianGnome You can already help out with the team without having joined it by doing bug triage, take a look at the wiki and their QA pages: https://wiki.debian.org/BugTriage https://udd.debian.org/dmd/?email1=pkg-gnome-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=pkg-gnome-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org Hello, I looked today at the pages but I found it confusing.How do I know which packages needs triaging and need for example confirming. Roelof
Re: Moving a package (to non-free)
On 2014-01-30 09:33, Оlе Ѕtrеісhеr wrote: Hi, Hi, CC'ing the FTP masters. I was trying to move a package (iausofa-c) from main to non-free with a new version. In the developers reference [1], the according paragraph is 5.9.1: If you need to change the section for one of your packages, change the package control information to place the package in the desired section, and re-upload the package So, I changed the section to non-free, and uploaded the new version 2013.12.02-1 (resp. I asked my sponsor to do so). However, this was followed by some unexpected things: 1. I got a traceback with a rejection [2] Looks like dak is not too happy with this case. Dear FTP masters, I think we could use a more human-readable message for this case: An exception was raised while processing the package: Traceback (most recent call last): File /srv/ftp-master.debian.org/dak/dak/process_policy.py, line 98, in wrapper function(upload, srcqueue, comments, transaction) File /srv/ftp-master.debian.org/dak/dak/process_policy.py, line 155, in comment_accept transaction.copy_binary(db_binary, suite, binary_component_func(db_binary), allow_tainted=allow_tainted, extra_archives=[upload.target_suite.archive]) File /srv/ftp-master.debian.org/dak/dak/process_policy.py, line 136, in binary_component_func .join(Component).one() File /usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/sqlalchemy/orm/query.py, line 2193, in one Multiple rows were found for one()) MultipleResultsFound: Multiple rows were found for one() (assuming you haven't implemented it already) 2. Someone then removed the old binary packages [3] 3. Then the package got accepted [4] 3. After a few days, I got a serious bug that the source is still in main [5] The uploaded package (from your [4]) does indeed seem to say it wants to be in non-free: [...] non-free/science optional iausofa-c_2013.12.02-1.dsc My local apt-cache also recognise them as in non-free: $ aptitude show libsofa-c0 libsofa-c-dev | grep Section Section: non-free/libs Section: non-free/libdevel But the source is located in the main pool! http://debian.morphium.info/debian/pool/main/i/iausofa-c/iausofa-c_2013.12.02-1.dsc Note the pool/*main*/, which should pool/*non-free*/ (minus my emphasis). This probably means that some part of dak still thinks the package should be in main... No I am unsure what to do. I followed the reference, but it was somehow not recognized. The real procedure to move a package seems to be different from the documentation. Is this a bug in the manual? And, if yes, what is the correct way? If not, should I file a bug against ftp-masters saying that the implementation to move a package is wrong? Or did I something fundamentally misunderstand here? Do I refer to the right section of the reference manual and do I interpret it correctly? Best regards Ole [1] https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#moving-pkgs [2] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-science-maintainers/2014-January/022351.html [3] http://bugs.debian.org/735677 [4] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-science-maintainers/2014-January/022360.html [5] http://bugs.debian.org/737055 I think we could use some help from the FTP masters side in figuring out what went wrong here and how to move forward from here. ~Niels -- 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/52ed1e80.2000...@thykier.net
Bug#737263: marked as done (RFS: libcitygml/0.14+svn134-1+3p2p0)
Your message dated Sat, 01 Feb 2014 16:34:09 + with message-id e1w9dwd-0002ge...@quantz.debian.org and subject line closing RFS: libcitygml/0.14+svn134-1+3p2p0 has caused the Debian Bug report #737263, regarding RFS: libcitygml/0.14+svn134-1+3p2p0 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 737263: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=737263 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package libcitygml Package name: libcitygml Version : 0.14+svn134-1+3p2p0 Upstream Author : Joachim Pouderoux jpouder...@gmail.com URL : http://code.google.com/p/libcitygml/ License : LGPL-2.1+ Section : libs It builds those binary packages: libcitygml0 - Open source C++ library for parsing CityGML files libcitygml0-bin - Utils of libcitygml - citygml2vrml and citygmltest libcitygml0-dev - Static and header files of libcitygml openscenegraph-plugin-citygml-shared - libcitygml OpenSceneGraph plugin (shared version) openscenegraph-plugin-citygml-static - libcitygml OpenSceneGraph plugin (static version) To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/libcitygml Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libc/libcitygml/libcitygml_0.14+svn134-1+3p2p0.dsc More information about libcitygml can be obtained from http://code.google.com/p/libcitygml/. Changes since the last upload: * Team upload. * Make Debian GIS Project Maintainer and YunQiang Su Uploader. * Drop obsolete DM-Upload-Allowed, permissions are granted in dak. * Use canonical URLs for Vcs-* fields. * Use copyright-format 1.0 instead of dep5 URL. * Fix libopenscenegraph version detection. * Fix 'information' typo in manpage, add patch to fix the typo in the code. * Update watch file for Subversion revisions. * Update to latest upstream Subversion revision. * Add symbols file using pkgkde-symbolshelper. * Bump Standards-Version to 3.9.5, changes: DM-Upload-Allowed, Vcs-* fields, copyright format, symbols file. Regards, Sebastiaan Couwenberg ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- Package libcitygml version 0.14+svn134-1+3p2p0 is in unstable now. http://packages.qa.debian.org/libcitygml---End Message---
new package to the archive
I have programmed an application in python + qt, I packaged as an application of debian, I would like to upload my application to repositories of debian and ubuntu , is under gpl license and is at this address: https://github.com/onlyOneUci/OnlyOne -- Conserva lo que tienes...Olvida lo que te duele...Lucha por lo que quieres... Valora lo que posees...Perdona a los que te hieren y disfruta a los que te aman. Nos pasamos la vida esperando que pase algo... y lo único que pasa es la vida. No entendemos el valor de los momentos, hasta que se han convertido en recuerdos. Por eso... Haz lo que quieras hacer, antes de que se convierta en lo que te gustaría haber hecho.. No hagas de tu vida un borrador, tal vez no tengas tiempo de pasarlo en limpio !! .C@rlos III Escuela Internacional de Invierno en la UCI del 17 al 28 de febrero del 2014. Ver www.uci.cu
Re: new package to the archive
Hi Carlos, A Debian package must be uploaded with the source code. Your package has several problems, as no long description and specific dependencies to Ubuntu. $ dpkg -I /tmp/onlyone-1.0.0_all.deb novo pacote debian, versão 2.0. 323770 bytes de tamanho: arquivo de controle=424 bytes. 409 bytes,12 linhas control Package: onlyone Version: 1.0.0 Architecture: all Maintainer: Carlos Ferras tufanati...@gmail.com Installed-Size: 6321 Depends: python-dateutil, python-kde4-dev, pyqt4-dev-tools, python2.7, python (= 2.7.1-0ubuntu2), python ( 2.8) Section: utils Priority: optional Homepage: https://www.facebook.com/freeonlyone Description: To find repeated files within a directory in linux systems Make in python+qt I found some structural problems too, using dpkg -c against the .deb. Please, read the Debian New Maintainers' Guide: https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/ https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/maint-guide.en.pdf Thanks. Eriberto 2014-02-01 C@rlos cmfer...@estudiantes.uci.cu: I have programmed an application in python + qt, I packaged as an application of debian, I would like to upload my application to repositories of debian and ubuntu, is under gpl license and is at this address: https://github.com/onlyOneUci/OnlyOne -- 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/CAP+dXJe8we1CObvUsjR1MDd6o0UM=eja1tujomi_avevp99...@mail.gmail.com
Re: new package to the archive
2014-02-01 C@rlos cmfer...@estudiantes.uci.cu: I have programmed an application in python + qt, I packaged as an application of debian, I would like to upload my application to repositories of debian and ubuntu, is under gpl license and is at this address: https://github.com/onlyOneUci/OnlyOne -- Conserva lo que tienes...Olvida lo que te duele...Lucha por lo que quieres... Valora lo que posees...Perdona a los que te hieren y disfruta a los que te aman. Nos pasamos la vida esperando que pase algo... y lo único que pasa es la vida. No entendemos el valor de los momentos, hasta que se han convertido en recuerdos. Por eso... Haz lo que quieras hacer, antes de que se convierta en lo que te gustaría haber hecho.. No hagas de tu vida un borrador, tal vez no tengas tiempo de pasarlo en limpio !! .C@rlos Your github only includes the binary package and not the source code of your application or the source package. I suggest that you start with the following documents: https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/ https://wiki.debian.org/UpstreamGuide Regards, -- Jordan Metzmeier -- 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/cad758rgydagkgb8lpjmlrq1cznrju07wpxgkz1-k1ncf7_v...@mail.gmail.com
Re: new package to the archive
2014-02-01 C@rlos cmfer...@estudiantes.uci.cu: thanks for the Recommended, I will work on that, but also need to know, then there are no problems, how can upload the application to repositories? Once the packaging issues are cleaned up, you will need a sponsor to upload it to the archives. The sponsors page on mentors[1] has information finding a sponsor. Also, new packages must close an ITP bug on their initial release. I believe the new maintainers guide has details on that. [1] http://mentors.debian.net/sponsors -- Regards, Jordan Metzmeier -- 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/cad758rg-vmeowmzcymuz_ef4ue4g74i6gv8nldjzddpmkcf...@mail.gmail.com
Bug#728059: RFS: gnome-shell-pomodoro/0.6.20131027-1 [ITA]
On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Joseph Herlant herla...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Vincent, Thanks for this advice. :-) I chose to use the patching approach because I found it cleaner (and wanted to play with quilt once again!). I recreated the package from the upstream 0.8 tag and used quilt to integrate the fixes in one patch. Package have been uploaded to mentors. Please tell me if you have remarks. You're already using source format '3.0 (quilt)', so please remove the extraneous build-dep on quilt and the --with quilt invocation in d/rules. Some more extra pedantic comments: - Why priority: extra instead of optional? Most packages should be set to optional by default (yes, I'm aware dh_make uses priority: extra as default for some reason) unless they conflict with packages of higher priority (Policy 2.5). - Please use wrap-and-sort -s from devscripts to have your build-deps and deps in d/control listed one per line and in alphabetical order (this generally makes it a _lot_ easier to review changes to build-dep/dep fields in d/control). - Consider removing the commented lines (the unused Vcs-* fields) in d/control I've run out of things to nitpick, so I think that means your package is about ready to be uploaded. ;) Cheers, Vincent -- 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/caczd_tbpub7srq3-8j0odtcjx2mktmyozxwrjpjs4nrbwfr...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Bug#717995: marked as done (RFS: rawdog/2.18-1 [ITA])
On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 4:10 AM, Adam Sampson a...@offog.org wrote: ow...@bugs.debian.org (Debian Bug Tracking System) writes: (closing http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=717995 because my rawdog package has been on mentors for 20 weeks) This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. Well, no, it hasn't. I'd still like to adopt the package, but I'm stuck at trying to find a mentor -- I've had helpful technical advice from several people but no interest in actually uploading the package (which has no outstanding problems as far as I'm aware). Is there anything further I can do at this point? It seems a shame to throw away the work that I've put into updating the package. I could go on a rant here about how I feel that package sponsorship isn't working (I've done that a few times pre-DM/DD), but now that I'm a DD, I can actually do something about it now... Adam, please re-upload rawdog to mentors and I promise you that I'll take a look at it (and upload it, unless there are some problems with your packaging) within a day or two (and if I don't, you're welcome to spam my inbox and slap me with a trout on IRC until I do so). Regards, Vincent -- 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/CACZd_tCPE8wTELMWBuR1PNsDZATu95=3dc0hnxtoqnr-jgl...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Mentor requested
On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 12:07 AM, Roelof Wobben wrote: I looked today at the pages but I found it confusing. How do I know which packages needs triaging and need for example confirming. For each package on the DDPO page, click on the link in the All Bugs column then click each bug. http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=pkg-gnome-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org For each bug, read the bug and decide what needs to happen to the bug and then change the bug. https://wiki.debian.org/BugTriage -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- 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/caktje6fzhoxivwks0hthk5qfsuiz6rfc7oxyut7ppph7hjc...@mail.gmail.com
