Bug#930274: RFS: junitparser/1.3.2-1 [ITP]
Hi! On Sun, 9 Jun 2019 17:21:48 +0200 Bastian Germann wrote: > Package: sponsorship-requests > Severity: wishlist > > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "junitparser". > > * Package name: junitparser >Version : 1.3.2-1 >Upstream Author : Joel Wang > * URL : https://github.com/gastlygem/junitparser > * License : Apache-2.0 >Section : python > > It builds those binary packages: > > python3-junitparser - Manipulates JUnit/xUnit Result XML files > > To access further information about this package, please visit the > following URL: > > https://mentors.debian.net/package/junitparser > > Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: > > dget -x > https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/j/junitparser/junitparser_1.3.2-1.dsc > > junitparser is a JUnit/xUnit result XML Parser. It can parse and > manipulate existing result XML files, or create new JUnit/xUnit result > XMLs from scratch. > > There are already two python packages in Debian that can create > JUnit/xUnit result XML files but there does not seem to be any that can > parse them to a domain specific object model. > > More information about junitparser can be obtained from > https://github.com/gastlygem/junitparser. I did a fast review on the package: Now running lintian junitparser_1.3.2-1_amd64.changes ... X: junitparser source: upstream-metadata-file-is-missing X: junitparser source: debian-watch-does-not-check-gpg-signature X: python3-junitparser: library-package-name-for-application usr/bin/junitparser X: python3-junitparser: application-in-library-section python usr/bin/junitparser # lintian-info -t 'tag' - upstream-metadata-file-is-missing It is pedantic. There are info here to fix that: Refer to https://dep-team.pages.debian.net/deps/dep12/ and https://wiki.debian.org/UpstreamMetadata for details. - debian-watch-does-not-check-gpg-signature There is gpg signature. Ignore. - library-package-name-for-application usr/bin/junitparser application-in-library-section python usr/bin/junitparser Junitparser README.rst file shows how to use it as a module and by command line. The command 'tree debian/python3-junitparser' shows the module and the command line script. The manpage is the README.rst file. Please split the package (one depends on other): - python3-junitparser is the module - junitparser is the 'utils' (in Section) The README.rst file. The command line part can be the manpage. The rest can be a documentation in '/usr/share' The package does not build twice because junitparser.egg-info dir is not removed between builds. Please override dh_clean to do that. There is no 'debian/tests/control' file. No CI. Please see to how run upstream tests by autopkgtest. https://ci.debian.net/ Regards, Herbert -
Bug#931013: RFS: python-in-toto/0.3.0-1 [ITP]
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "python-in-toto" * Package name: python-in-toto Version : 0.3.0-1 Upstream Author : NYU Secure Systems Lab * URL : https://in-toto.io * License : Apache-2.0 Section : devel It builds those binary packages: python3-in-toto - software supply chain security framework To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/python-in-toto Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/python-in-toto/python-in-toto_0.3.0-1.dsc More information about python-in-toto can be obtained from https://github.com/in-toto/in-toto. Also see below resources about how in-toto may be used to verify the integrity of the software supply chain of any Debian package: - https://debconf17.debconf.org/talks/100/ - https://saimei.ftp.acc.umu.se/Public/debian-meetings/2019/miniconf-hamburg/in-toto.webm in-toto depends on the general purpose crypto and schema library "securesystemslib", for which I have already filed an ITP under the subject "RFS: python-securesystemslib/0.11.3-1 [ITP]". Changes since the last upload: python-in-toto (0.3.0-1) unstable; urgency=low * Initial Debian release from tag: https://github.com/in-toto/in-toto/tree/v0.3.0 -- Lukas Puehringer Fri, 07 Jun 2019 10:50:40 -0400 Regards, Lukas Pühringer -- lukas.puehrin...@nyu.edu PGP fingerprint: 8BA6 9B87 D43B E294 F23E 8120 89A2 AD3C 07D9 62E8 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#931015: RFS: python-securesystemslib/0.11.3-1 [ITP]
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "python-securesystemslib". * Package name: python-securesystemslib Version : 0.11.3-1 Upstream Author : NYU Secure Systems Lab * URL : https://github.com/secure-systems-lab/securesystemslib * License : MIT Section : devel It builds those binary packages: python3-securesystemslib - crypto and schema library for TUF and in-toto To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/python-securesystemslib Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/python-securesystemslib/python-securesystemslib_0.11.3-1.dsc More information about python-securesystemslib can be obtained from https://github.com/secure-systems-lab/securesystemslib. Also see below resources about how securesystemslib's two main dependents, TUF and in-toto, are useful for Debian. - https://debconf17.debconf.org/talks/100/ - https://debconf17.debconf.org/talks/153/ - https://saimei.ftp.acc.umu.se/Public/debian-meetings/2019/miniconf-hamburg/in-toto.webm Changes since the last upload: python-securesystemslib (0.11.3-1) unstable; urgency=low * Initial Debian release from tag: https://github.com/secure-systems-lab/securesystemslib/tree/sslibv0.11.3 -- Lukas Puehringer Fri, 07 Jun 2019 11:03:22 -0400 Regards, Lukas Pühringer -- lukas.puehrin...@nyu.edu PGP fingerprint: 8BA6 9B87 D43B E294 F23E 8120 89A2 AD3C 07D9 62E8 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#931026: RFS: apt-transport-in-toto/0.1.0 [ITP]
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "apt-transport-in-toto" * Package name: apt-transport-in-toto Version : 0.1.0 Upstream Author : in-toto developers * URL : https://github.com/in-toto/apt-transport-in-toto * License : Apache-2.0 Section : devel It builds those binary packages: apt-transport-in-toto - apt transport method for in-toto supply chain verification To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/apt-transport-in-toto Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/a/apt-transport-in-toto/apt-transport-in-toto_0.1.0.dsc More information about apt-transport-in-toto and the underlying in-toto verification protocol can be obtained from https://in-toto.io. apt-transport-in-toto depends on "in-toto", which in turn depends on the general purpose crypto and schema library "securesystemslib", for both of which ITPs are available: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=931013 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=931015 apt-transport-in-toto was demonstrated at MiniDebConf 2019 in Hamburg. A recording of the talk and demo is available at: https://saimei.ftp.acc.umu.se/Public/debian-meetings/2019/miniconf-hamburg/in-toto.webm Build instructions (with pointers to build instructions for securesystemslib and in-toto) are available under: https://github.com/in-toto/apt-transport-in-toto/commit/34b347729ed77fa6aa43bcce586367aca9b92922 Note that there are some decisions about the root of trust and key distribution to be made before uploading the package. See inline TODO comments in "*.install" file and a corresponding GitHub discussion for more details: https://github.com/in-toto/apt-transport-in-toto/blob/debian/debian/apt-transport-in-toto.install https://github.com/in-toto/apt-transport-in-toto/issues/13 Changes since the last upload: apt-transport-in-toto (0.1.0) unstable; urgency=low * Initial Debian release. -- Lukas Puehringer Fri, 07 Jun 2019 12:14:02 -0400 Regards, Lukas Pühringer -- lukas.puehrin...@nyu.edu PGP fingerprint: 8BA6 9B87 D43B E294 F23E 8120 89A2 AD3C 07D9 62E8 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#931036: RFS: dhelp/0.6.26 QA, RC
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: important Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "dhelp" Package name : dhelp Version : 0.6.26 License : GPL-2 Section : doc It builds those binary packages: dhelp - online help system To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/dhelp Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/dhelp/dhelp_0.6.26.dsc Changes since the last upload: * Do not remove entire /usr/share/doc/HTML directory while reindexing or deinstalling (closes: #929850). * Add the sensible-utils package as runtime dependency. * Use Git repository at the salsa.debian.org site. Regards, Nicholas Guriev
Bug#931036: marked as done (RFS: dhelp/0.6.26 QA, RC)
Your message dated Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:26:28 -0500 with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#931036: RFS: dhelp/0.6.26 QA, RC has caused the Debian Bug report #931036, regarding RFS: dhelp/0.6.26 QA, RC 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.) -- 931036: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=931036 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: important Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "dhelp" Package name : dhelp Version : 0.6.26 License : GPL-2 Section : doc It builds those binary packages: dhelp - online help system To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/dhelp Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/dhelp/dhelp_0.6.26.dsc Changes since the last upload: * Do not remove entire /usr/share/doc/HTML directory while reindexing or deinstalling (closes: #929850). * Add the sensible-utils package as runtime dependency. * Use Git repository at the salsa.debian.org site. Regards, Nicholas Guriev --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Hi, On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 at 17:16, Коля Гурьев wrote: > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "dhelp" > > Package name : dhelp > Version : 0.6.26 > License : GPL-2 > Section : doc > > It builds those binary packages: > > dhelp - online help system > > To access further information about this package, please visit the > following URL: > > https://mentors.debian.net/package/dhelp Uploaded, thanks! I have forked your repo as https://salsa.debian.org/debian/dhelp and pushed an additional change and tags there. -- Cheers, Andrej--- End Message ---
Re: Bug#931036: RFS: dhelp/0.6.26 QA, RC
Hi, On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 at 17:16, Коля Гурьев wrote: > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "dhelp" > > Package name : dhelp > Version : 0.6.26 > License : GPL-2 > Section : doc > > It builds those binary packages: > > dhelp - online help system > > To access further information about this package, please visit the > following URL: > > https://mentors.debian.net/package/dhelp Uploaded, thanks! I have forked your repo as https://salsa.debian.org/debian/dhelp and pushed an additional change and tags there. -- Cheers, Andrej
Bug#928099: publishing private e-mail
Hi All, I'm sorry if my message come out wrong, and being perceived as unfriendly. That was not my intention, and I'm sorry that people feel that way. Again, I was trying to say that, we were discussing the public matters that affects the package authors, thus affects the public, and I should have included 928...@bugs.debian.org at the very beginning. And I'm sorry for not having done that sooner, which might have changed everything, or might be not. But I'll start doing it now. On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 10:39 AM Mo Zhou - lu...@debian.org wrote: > Hi Tong Sun, > > Please be respectful to the others. Whatever the mail address prefix > the others use, the others have the right to make private discussion > and free speech because these are fundamental rights. I don't know > what happend but your comments are really not friendly. > > If you really received problematic messages from a Debian developer, > please consider reaching out the Anti-harrasment team or DPL for help, > privately. > > > On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 07:55:04AM -0400, Tong Sun wrote: > >> > > >> > To me, your message, bearing a @debian.org address, should represent > >> > that of debian.org, both privately or publicly, and never says thing > >> that you will regret later, or say it publicly. Especially we are > >> discussing public matters, that affects the public and all authors. > >> > >> Such decision should not be conducted behind close doors. > > >
