Bug#1072518: RFS: debpic/1.0.0 [ITP] -- build Debian packages in an isolated Docker environment
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package debpic: * Package name : debpic * Version : 1.0.0 * Upstream contact : Aidan Gallagher (aidg...@gmail.com) * URL : https://github.com/aidan-gallagher/debpic * License : LGPL-2.0+ * Vcs : https://github.com/aidan-gallagher/debpic.git The source builds the following binary packages: debpic To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/debpic/ <https://mentors.debian.net/package/hello/> Alternatively, you can download the package with 'dget' using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/debpic/debpic_1.0.0.dsc Changes since the last upload: * Initial Release. Regards, Aidan Gallagher
Bug#1061111: RFS: dpkg-buildenv/1.0.0 [ITP] -- Builds debian packages in a docker container.
Thanks for taking the time to comment Guillem. On Fri, 19 Jan 2024, 00:08 Guillem Jover, wrote: > Hi! > > On Thu, 2024-01-18 at 23:14:49 +0000, Aidan wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 6:30 PM David Kalnischkies wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 02:35:40PM +, Aidan wrote: > > > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "dpkg-buildenv": > > > > > > Similar to my recent "veto" of apt-verify in #1059267, which was > > > subsequently ignored and pushed into the archive anyhow, I would > > > like to call into question the naming of the package/application… > > > > > > There are various "dpkg-build*" tools already that grabbing 'env' feels > > > wrong (I would confuse it probably with 'flag' on a bad day), > especially > > > if that isn't at least discussed with dpkg maintainers (I at least see > > > no mention of it on the list) and given that this is something that > > > "just" works with Docker. > > Just by chance I had seen the mail on the mentors list, but thanks for > the heads-up, because I tend to look there very sporadically! > > My reaction was pretty similar TBH. There's enough confusion with > things like dpkg-reconfigure and dpkg-preconfigure and other packages > that have also grabbed from the dpkg-* namespace, which I'd like to > reduce. In this case, it would remove the possibility to use such name > in the future, creates confusion, and it looks like a layer violation, > because it's setting up apt, containers and stuff which should be > sitting on top and not below dpkg. > That's a good point about it looking like a layer violation. > > > > As explained in the other bug, there is no veto and as you can see its > > > easy to completely ignore me (and anyone else) but I wanted to say it > > > anyhow, so that nobody is surprised later on. > > > Thanks for taking a look David. > > For the name I choose "dpkg'' because it stands for "debian package" and > > dpkg-buildenv is intrinsically related to debian packaging. > > However I understand the usage of dpkg may imply the package has been > > officially created and maintained by the dpkg developers. > > Yes, see above. I also appreciate naming is hard, :) but all other > similar implementations could have claimed the same about using dpkg-*, > and I think josch questions are also relevant, even though I also > understand that even among all other options, none might seem > completely suitable to you. But… > > > If the package's name was the last blocking issue preventing adoption in > > Debian then I would spend the time to rename it. > > …regardless of whether this is or not the last blocking issue, I'd > still very much appreciate if you could rename the project and tool > upstream. :) I shall rename the tool to remove "dpkg". Unless there are any objections I'm going to rename it to: "debpic: DEbian Build Package In Container" > > Thanks, > Guillem >
Bug#1061111: RFS: dpkg-buildenv/1.0.0 [ITP] -- Builds debian packages in a docker container.
On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 6:30 PM David Kalnischkies wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 02:35:40PM +0000, Aidan wrote: > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "dpkg-buildenv": > > Similar to my recent "veto" of apt-verify in #1059267, which was > subsequently ignored and pushed into the archive anyhow, I would > like to call into question the naming of the package/application… > > There are various "dpkg-build*" tools already that grabbing 'env' feels > wrong (I would confuse it probably with 'flag' on a bad day), especially > if that isn't at least discussed with dpkg maintainers (I at least see > no mention of it on the list) and given that this is something that > "just" works with Docker. > > > As explained in the other bug, there is no veto and as you can see its > easy to completely ignore me (and anyone else) but I wanted to say it > anyhow, so that nobody is surprised later on. > > > Best regards > > David Kalnischkies > Thanks for taking a look David. For the name I choose "dpkg'' because it stands for "debian package" and dpkg-buildenv is intrinsically related to debian packaging. However I understand the usage of dpkg may imply the package has been officially created and maintained by the dpkg developers. If the package's name was the last blocking issue preventing adoption in Debian then I would spend the time to rename it.
Bug#1061111: RFS: dpkg-buildenv/1.0.0 [ITP] -- Builds debian packages in a docker container.
On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 9:04 PM Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues < jo...@debian.org> wrote: > Hi Aidan, > > On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 16:52:26 +0100 Andrey Rakhmatullin > wrote: > > I see you added this tool to the list of similar tools on the wiki so you > > at least know about that list. So how is your tool better than other > tools > > on that list, or at least than the ones packaged in Debian? > > Please also note that if you followed the procedure outlined at > > https://mentors.debian.net/intro-maintainers/ and filed an ITP bug > before > > doing the packaging this discussion would happen there, not on the RFS > bug. > > Unlike other tools, dpkg-buildenv provides a complete dockerfile ( https://github.com/aidan-gallagher/dpkg-buildenv/blob/main/dpkg-buildenv/Dockerfile) which describes the environment setup. This makes it easy to integrate with other tools such as Jenkins ( https://github.com/aidan-gallagher/dpkg-buildenv/blob/main/dpkg-buildenv/Documentation/using-with-jenkins.md) and VSCode ( https://github.com/aidan-gallagher/dpkg-buildenv/blob/main/dpkg-buildenv/Documentation/using-with-vscode.md ). By integrating the Dockerfile with your Continuous Integration System (Jenkins), it means the Jenkin's & developer's environment is guaranteed to be the exact same. I've written about the benefits of that here: https://aidangallagher.co.uk/articles/continuous-integration-pipeline/. The ability to run the Jenkins workload within a container is the reason I started the work. > I'm the current maintainer of sbuild. You found the wiki page and you saw > that > there already exist 10 different implementations of utilities that build > Debian > packages inside a docker container. You still decided to add an eleventh > implementation so I guess my plea here will not amount to much but anyways > here > goes my sales pitch: > > If you want your code to be in Debian, please consider reviewing the patch > attached to this bug report: > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=867176 > > I'm not a docker user, so I cannot verify whether this is indeed doing the > right thing but you are, so it should be easy for you to take it, test it > and > finalize it. > > I'm afraid contributing to an existing tool is not as sexy as supplying one > that is 100% written by you but I can guarantee you that if you can clean > up > that patch, I will apply it to sbuild and your code will be in Debian > proper. > > Maybe, hopefully we can make sbuilder and/or pbuilder work with docker > instead > of having eleven competing implementations doing the same thing? > > Thanks! > > cheers, josch Thank you for taking the time to reply. I shall have a look at sbuild and that patch however I am not familiar with Perl and I imagine the sbuild implementation will be relatively more complicated than dpkg-buildenv.
Bug#1061111: RFS: dpkg-buildenv/1.0.0 [ITP] -- Builds debian packages in a docker container.
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "dpkg-buildenv": * Package name : dpkg-buildenv Version : 1.0.0 Upstream contact : Aidan Gallagher (aidg...@gmail.com) * URL : https://github.com/aidan-gallagher/dpkg-buildenv * License : LGPL-2.0+ * Vcs : https://github.com/aidan-gallagher/dpkg-buildenv.git Section : misc The source builds the following binary packages: dpkg-buildenv - Builds debian packages in a docker container. To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/dpkg-buildenv/ Alternatively, you can download the package with 'dget' using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/dpkg-buildenv/dpkg-buildenv_1.0.0.dsc Changes for the initial release: dpkg-buildenv (1.0.0) unstable; urgency=low . * Initial Release. Kind Regards, Aidan
Bug#1041612: closed by Andrey Rakhmatullin (Re: Bug#1041612: RFS: dh-git/1.0 [ITP])
OK, thank you for your quick feedback. If the implementation is fundamentally flawed then I think I'll just leave it. Thank you for the links - I'll follow that approach if I try to add another package in the future. Kind regards, Aidan Gallagher On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 1:33 PM Debian Bug Tracking System < ow...@bugs.debian.org> wrote: > This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report > which was filed against the sponsorship-requests package: > > #1041612: RFS: dh-git/1.0 [ITP] > > It has been closed by Andrey Rakhmatullin . > > Their explanation is attached below along with your original report. > If this explanation is unsatisfactory and you have not received a > better one in a separate message then please contact Andrey Rakhmatullin < > w...@wrar.name> by > replying to this email. > > > -- > 1041612: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1041612 > Debian Bug Tracking System > Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems > > > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: Andrey Rakhmatullin > To: Aidan , 1041612-d...@bugs.debian.org > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2023 14:06:36 +0200 > Subject: Re: Bug#1041612: RFS: dh-git/1.0 [ITP] > On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 12:35:29PM +0100, Aidan wrote: > > Package: sponsorship-requests > > Severity: normal [important for RC bugs, wishlist for new packages] > > > > Dear mentors, > > > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "dh-git": > > > > * Package name : dh-git > > Version : 1.0 > > Upstream contact : Aidan Gallagher (aidg...@gmail.com) > > * URL : https://github.com/aidan-gallagher/dh-git > I don't think this works, because Debian packages don't include the > upstream Git repo. The implementation (modifying debian/control) is also > very wrong. So I'm closing this RFS and if you come with an implementation > that actually works you should ask for feedback on it before asking for > sponsorship. > > > To access further information about this package, please visit the > > following URL: > > (This text is from the template. The link does not work. I'm not sure > what > > I am meant to do here). > You were meant to follow https://mentors.debian.net/intro-maintainers/ and > upload your package to mentors.debian.net. > Also as a part of that guide you would file an ITP bug report and would get > the same feedback on this software before starting to work on the > packaging for it. > > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: Aidan > To: sub...@bugs.debian.org > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2023 12:35:29 +0100 > Subject: RFS: dh-git/1.0 [ITP] > Package: sponsorship-requests > Severity: normal [important for RC bugs, wishlist for new packages] > > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "dh-git": > > * Package name : dh-git > Version : 1.0 > Upstream contact : Aidan Gallagher (aidg...@gmail.com) > * URL : https://github.com/aidan-gallagher/dh-git > * License : LGPL-2.0+ > * Vcs : g...@github.com:aidan-gallagher/dh-git.git > Section : [fill in] > > The source builds the following binary packages: > > * dh_git - embed git version data into debian package metadata > * dh_git_clean - undo changes by dh_git > > To access further information about this package, please visit the > following URL: > (This text is from the template. The link does not work. I'm not sure what > I am meant to do here). > > https://mentors.debian.net/package/dh-git/ > > Alternatively, you can download the package with 'dget' using this command: > > dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/h/hello/dh-git_1.0.dsc > > Changes since the last upload: > > * Initial Release. > > Regards, >
Bug#1041612: RFS: dh-git/1.0 [ITP]
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal [important for RC bugs, wishlist for new packages] Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "dh-git": * Package name : dh-git Version : 1.0 Upstream contact : Aidan Gallagher (aidg...@gmail.com) * URL : https://github.com/aidan-gallagher/dh-git * License : LGPL-2.0+ * Vcs : g...@github.com:aidan-gallagher/dh-git.git Section : [fill in] The source builds the following binary packages: * dh_git - embed git version data into debian package metadata * dh_git_clean - undo changes by dh_git To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: (This text is from the template. The link does not work. I'm not sure what I am meant to do here). https://mentors.debian.net/package/dh-git/ Alternatively, you can download the package with 'dget' using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/h/hello/dh-git_1.0.dsc Changes since the last upload: * Initial Release. Regards,
