Bug#1072906: Processed: RFS: markdown-mode/2.6-2 [Team] -- mode for editing Markdown-formatted text files in GNU Emacs
On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 07:26:24PM -0400, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
> Control: owner -1 s...@debian.org
>
> "Debian Bug Tracking System" writes:
>
> > Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> >
> >> close 1072906
> > Bug #1072906 [sponsorship-requests] RFS: markdown-mode/2.6-2 [Team] -- mode
> > for editing Markdown-formatted text files in GNU Emacs
> > Marked Bug as done
> >> stop
> > Stopping processing here.
> >
> > Please contact me if you need assistance.
>
> Please deactivate your bug-closing script for this bug.
Done. I've added an hardcoded exception for this bug. Please let me know when I
can remove it.
foreach my $rfs ( sort {$a <=> $b} keys %$rfsbuginfo )
{
next if $rfs eq '1072906';
# Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 19:26:24 -0400
# From: Nicholas D Steeves
# Please deactivate your bug-closing script for this bug.
> Spwhitton
> uploaded an unrelated -2 that didn't include any of Xiyue Deng
> (manphiz)'s work.
Well, this is why...
>
> I'm working on a reply.
>
> Thanks,
> Nicholas
--
Re: mentors review subject
On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 07:27:13PM +0100, Phil Wyett wrote: > On Tue, 2024-07-23 at 20:07 +0200, Bart Martens wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 08:51:32AM +0100, Phil Wyett wrote: > > > On Mon, 2024-07-22 at 10:26 -0700, Soren Stoutner wrote: > > > > On Monday, July 22, 2024 8:08:08 AM MST Phil Wyett wrote: > > > > > Your absolutely right. The use of these tags would be better and I > > > > > shall do > > > > > so. When Salvo wishes to browse ready packages, all that needs to be > > > > > done is > > > > > follow the below link: > > > > > > > > > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi? > > > > include=tags%3Aconfirmed;package > > > > > =sponsorship-requests > > > > > > > > Why not use mark it as ready using both the tags and the email subject? > > > > That > > > > way, people using either interface can easily see RFPs that are ready. > > > > > > > > > > Hi again, > > > > > > Thought... Would changing subject cause issue with the scripts of 'bartm' > > > that run against mentors? > > > > It is currently unclear what exactly the question is. Can I help here? > > > > Hi Bart, > > Apologies, I should have explained. > > To more easily show if a package on mentors with RFS is ready for a DD to > look at/is sane. It has been request that amending the subject/RFS title with > "Ready", "Confirmed" or similar too it. Would your scripts see a change and > revert any addition something else? Thanks for asking and explaining. Well, an RFS in itself already expresses a request for sponsorship, meaning that the package should be availabe for review. When the package is not available, or no longer needs reviewing, then there should be no open RFS. There is also the flag "needs a sponsor=yes" at mentors.d.n expressing a request for sponsorship. Keeping this flag (and the package version) in sync with the RFS is often forgotten. I believe that adding something in the RFS title expressing somewhat the same, would complicate things even more. New packagers are already often confused on when to open or close an RFP, ITP, RFA, O, ITA or RFS, against wnpp or sponsorship-requests or the package name, and also on whether to use mentors.d.n or an RFS or both. And on whether one should ask for a review on the debian-mentors mailing list. So I would rather like to see things simplified, for both packagers and sponsors. In my view a web interface like mentors.d.n is easier understood by newcomers. So maybe the better choice could be dropping RFSes alltogether? Does the above answer your question? > > Regards > > Phil > > -- > "I play the game for the game’s own sake" > > Arthur Conan Doyle - The Adventure of the Bruce-Partington Plans > > -- > > Internet Relay Chat (IRC): kathenas > > Website: https://kathenas.org > > Instagram: https://instagram.com/kathenasorg/ > > Buy Me A Coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/kathenasorg > > -- > --
Re: mentors review subject
On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 08:51:32AM +0100, Phil Wyett wrote: > On Mon, 2024-07-22 at 10:26 -0700, Soren Stoutner wrote: > > On Monday, July 22, 2024 8:08:08 AM MST Phil Wyett wrote: > > > Your absolutely right. The use of these tags would be better and I shall > > > do > > > so. When Salvo wishes to browse ready packages, all that needs to be done > > > is > > > follow the below link: > > > > > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi? > > include=tags%3Aconfirmed;package > > > =sponsorship-requests > > > > Why not use mark it as ready using both the tags and the email subject? > > That > > way, people using either interface can easily see RFPs that are ready. > > > > Hi again, > > Thought... Would changing subject cause issue with the scripts of 'bartm' > that run against mentors? It is currently unclear what exactly the question is. Can I help here? > > Regards > > Phil > > -- > "I play the game for the game’s own sake" > > Arthur Conan Doyle - The Adventure of the Bruce-Partington Plans > > -- > > Internet Relay Chat (IRC): kathenas > > Website: https://kathenas.org > > Instagram: https://instagram.com/kathenasorg/ > > Buy Me A Coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/kathenasorg > > -- > --
Re: Bug#1073267: RFS: gpp/2.28-2 [ITA] -- general-purpose preprocessor with customizable syntax
On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 11:07:23AM -0300, Leandro Cunha wrote: > On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 5:08 AM Bart Martens wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 06:32:41PM -0300, Leandro Cunha wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 6:03 PM Phil Wyett > > > wrote: > > > > 3. Licenses check: ISSUES > > > > > [...] > > > and it is also something maintained upstream. > > [...] > > > I don't really like the idea of changing what is maintained upstream, > > > > There might be a misunderstanding. In my understanding debian/copyright, > > which > > is maintained in Debian, needs to be modified to match the upstream files. > > Right? > > I've already contacted the DD who > reviewed the last change to talk about it and see if he can help me > change it. I await responses and a new version of this file is ready > for review. I had a look at f73fb5a6e805b6ee9620b4b20a144f5f92872b0d just now. I understand that you're awaiting responses. Let's do an other review after that. Cheers, Bart
Re: Bug#1073267: RFS: gpp/2.28-2 [ITA] -- general-purpose preprocessor with customizable syntax
On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 06:32:41PM -0300, Leandro Cunha wrote: > On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 6:03 PM Phil Wyett wrote: > > 3. Licenses check: ISSUES > [...] > and it is also something maintained upstream. [...] > I don't really like the idea of changing what is maintained upstream, There might be a misunderstanding. In my understanding debian/copyright, which is maintained in Debian, needs to be modified to match the upstream files. Right? Cheers, Bart
Bug#928099: publishing private e-mail
Hello Tong Sun, I hereby inform you that I unfortunately lack the time and interest to further review the shc package. I suggest finding someone else on the mentors mailing list or via other channels. In case there is no volunteer available in short time, then there is also paid support, see this link: https://www.debian.org/support Cheers, Bart On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 07:55:04AM -0400, Tong Sun wrote: > On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 7:50 AM 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. > > > On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 7:45 AM Bart Martens wrote: > > > > > > Tong Sun, > > > > > > Please never publish my e-mails without my permission. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Bart > > >
Bug#923636: RFS: jag/0.3.5-4 -- arcade and puzzle 2D game
On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 08:09:17PM -0300, Carlos Donizete Froes wrote: > Hi Bart, > > > Are you aware that the file debian/not-installed was added? I doubt that > > this > > was intentional. > > I do not know if you can help me, but when I go to debuild[1] my package, > this warning > occurs. > > [1] https://paste.debian.net/1071745 > > I followed the options debuild offered me. Okay, it's just a matter of taste. The files in debian/tmp/ are indeed also installed elsewhere, and from there included in the packages, so it is okay to suppress the noise from dh_missing with a debian/not-installed file. I would however (the taste part) not just copy that noise to debian/not-installed as-is (which seems to work), but rather cleanly list the files, or even put just one line "debian/tmp/*" in debian/not-installed since all those files are installed twice. Or have no debian/not-installed file, leaving the noise in the build output. As said, it's just a matter of taste. So I've just uploaded your package to unstable as you made it. Cheers, Bart
Bug#923636: RFS: jag/0.3.5-4 -- arcade and puzzle 2D game
Hi Carlos, About this package at mentors: Version:0.3.5-4 Uploaded: 2019-03-03 08:05 Source package: https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/j/jag/jag_0.3.5-4.dsc Are you aware that the file debian/not-installed was added? I doubt that this was intentional. | (sid)bartm@walker:~/src/sponsoring$ diff -ruN orig/jag-0.3.5/ jag-0.3.5/|grep ^+++ | +++ jag-0.3.5/debian/changelog 2019-03-03 07:04:53.0 +0100 | +++ jag-0.3.5/debian/compat2019-03-03 07:04:53.0 +0100 | +++ jag-0.3.5/debian/control 2019-03-03 07:04:53.0 +0100 | +++ jag-0.3.5/debian/copyright 2019-03-03 07:04:53.0 +0100 | +++ jag-0.3.5/debian/not-installed 2019-03-03 07:04:53.0 +0100 | (sid)bartm@walker:~/src/sponsoring$ head jag-0.3.5/debian/not-installed | dh_missing: usr/games/jag exists in debian/tmp but is not installed to anywhere | dh_missing: usr/share/games/jag/data/schemes/futurama/bg1.jpg exists in debian/tmp but is not installed to anywhere | dh_missing: usr/share/games/jag/data/schemes/futurama/bg3.jpg exists in debian/tmp but is not installed to anywhere | dh_missing: usr/share/games/jag/data/schemes/futurama/bg2.jpg exists in debian/tmp but is not installed to anywhere | dh_missing: usr/share/games/jag/data/schemes/futurama/item5.png exists in debian/tmp but is not installed to anywhere | dh_missing: usr/share/games/jag/data/schemes/futurama/item3.png exists in debian/tmp but is not installed to anywhere | dh_missing: usr/share/games/jag/data/schemes/futurama/item6.png exists in debian/tmp but is not installed to anywhere | dh_missing: usr/share/games/jag/data/schemes/futurama/item2.png exists in debian/tmp but is not installed to anywhere | dh_missing: usr/share/games/jag/data/schemes/futurama/item4.png exists in debian/tmp but is not installed to anywhere | dh_missing: usr/share/games/jag/data/schemes/futurama/item1.png exists in debian/tmp but is not installed to anywhere Cheers, Bart
Bug#923039: RFS: dayon
Hi, building the .deb with mvn is not sufficient for a package to enter Debian I'm afraid. The best I can advise at this point is to do some more reading and try to make a source package that is accessible for mentors/sponsors here with a .dsc file. Let's start with that and see where to go from there. - Bart
Bug#921482: RFS: note/1.3.26-3
About this package at mentors: Version:1.3.26-3 Uploaded: 2019-02-16 01:38 Source package: https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/n/note/note_1.3.26-3.dsc In debian/patches/fix-spelling.patch some spelling fixes got removed, I guess accidentally. For example "aditional" and "usefull". I think you meant to keep the existing fixes and to add more fixes.
Bug#922993: RFS: popout3d/1.5.0-1
It's there now. With version 1.5.0. Shouldn't that be 1.5.0-1? https://mentors.debian.net/package/popout3d
Bug#922993: RFS: popout3d
It's not at mentors at this time. Can you upload it there?
Re: mentor of for packaging, testing, and including a game
On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 04:13:07AM +, Pedro Pena wrote: > I would like to ask for a mentor/sponsor to help me package, test, and > include a game in the debian repos. > > I've already submitted and ITP > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=922844 [...] > Please let me know what else I should do. Let's take it step by step. A useful first step would be that you upload your package to mentors.debian.net so a few automatic checks may guide you to a few next steps and that the package becomes more visible to sponsors looking there. Cheers, Bart
package versions at mentors
Hi maintainers of mentors.debian.net, Great platform. A possible improvement: It would be nice if the version of a package on the overview page is always the version of the first package on the package detail page. Example: https://mentors.debian.net/packages pymacs pymacs - interface between Emacs Lisp and Python0.25-1.2 Emmanuel Arias Yes https://mentors.debian.net/package/pymacs Package versions Version 0.25-2 Cheers, Bart
Bug#921586: RFS: pymacs/0.25-1.2 [ITA]
Hi Emmanuel, Good to see you want to adopt this package. However, the version ending with -1.2 seems meant for a non-maintainer upload. Any specific reason for using an non-maintainer upload version number here? Cheers, Bart
Bug#921403: RFS: pyfltk/1.3.4.1-1 [ITP]
Hi Robert, This package has been removed from Debian some time ago. Are you sure that bringing it back has good value? https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=870935 Also, there should be an ITP (not to be confused with an RFS with [ITA]). Cheers, Bart
Bug#914730: missing itp
Hello, For packages not yet in debian, there must be an ITP as meant here: https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/ch05.en.html#newpackage Cheers, Bart
Bug#834245: RFS: arasan/19.0.1-1 [ITP] -- a strong chess engine using xboard
reopen 834245 stop Sorry my mistake, reopening.
Bug#834205: RFS: dh-elpa/1.1 -- Debian helper tools for packaging emacs lisp extensions
Control -1 tags moreinfo Hi Sean, The package at mentors (2016-08-13 03:02) contains more changes than mentioned in debian/changelog. Can you complete debian/changelog or undo some changes? $ diff -ruN orig/dh-elpa-1.0 dh-elpa-1.1 |grep "^+++ " +++ dh-elpa-1.1/debian/changelog2016-08-13 04:51:04.0 +0200 +++ dh-elpa-1.1/dh_elpa.1 2016-08-13 03:50:21.0 +0200 +++ dh-elpa-1.1/dh-elpa.el 2016-08-13 04:51:01.0 +0200 +++ dh-elpa-1.1/dh_elpa.in 2016-08-13 04:51:01.0 +0200 +++ dh-elpa-1.1/dh_elpa_test.1 2016-08-13 03:50:22.0 +0200 +++ dh-elpa-1.1/.gitattributes 1970-01-01 01:00:00.0 +0100 +++ dh-elpa-1.1/.gitignore 1970-01-01 01:00:00.0 +0100 Regards, Bart Martens
Bug#827582: missing ITP
Hi Lumin, Where is the ITP? There should be one, see the instructions at "new packages": https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#newpackage Regards, Bart Martens
Bug#822613: missing ITP
Hi Rohan, Where is the ITP? There should be one, see the instructions at "new packages": https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#newpackage Regards, Bart Martens
Bug#829081: missing ITP
Hi Thomas, Where is the ITP? There should be one, see the instructions at "new packages": https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#newpackage Regards, Bart Martens
Bug#822149: missing ITP
Hi Herbert, Where is the ITP? There should be one, see the instructions at "new packages": https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#newpackage Regards, Bart Martens
Bug#827895: missing ITP
Hi Lumin, Where is the ITP? There should be one, see the instructions at "new packages": https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#newpackage Regards, Bart Martens
Bug#827590: missing ITP
Hi Lumin, Where is the ITP? There should be one, see the instructions at "new packages": https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#newpackage Regards, Bart Martens
Bug#825390: missing ITP
Hi Emily, Where is the ITP? There should be one, see the instructions at "new packages": https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#newpackage Regards, Bart Martens
Bug#790945: RFS: ismrmrd/1.2.3-2
reopen 790945 stop Ghislain, I see that 1.2.3-1 is in unstable. Are you looking for sponsorship for updating this package to 1.2.3-2? If yes, where is the package to sponsor? It's not on mentors at this time... 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: https://lists.debian.org/20150703173728.gc27...@master.debian.org
Bug#788217: RFS: clfft/2.4-1 [ITP Bug#783084] -- OpenCL FFT library
reopen 788217 owner 783084 Ghislain Vaillant ghisv...@gmail.com stop I had overlooked With his authorization. Reopening and setting Ghislain as the owner of the ITP. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150613091733.ga12...@master.debian.org
Bug#768487: RFS: fasm
Hi Thomas, If you intend to package fasm, then please retitle RFP 513402 to ITP and set yourself as the owner. That makes clear that you are working on this, so nobody else does duplicate effort. 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: https://lists.debian.org/20141108130403.gb28...@master.debian.org
Bug#766427: RFS: xsettingsd/0.0.20140814+74+b7312ce-1
Hi Ranga, Do you intend to adopt xsettingsd? If yes, then please retitle 763987 from RFA to ITA and set yourself as the owner. 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: https://lists.debian.org/20141028193309.gk22...@master.debian.org
Re: review eject 2.1.5+deb1+cvs20081104-13.1 2014-02-14 21:29
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 12:58:33PM +, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: Il Domenica 23 Febbraio 2014 10:39, Bart Martens ba...@debian.org ha scritto: 1. The patch makes the program use one additional position of the memory pointed to by buf. Are you sure that there will be no buffer overflow for any value of name without replacing 14 by 15 in the allocation ? I don't see any particular issues there. I couldn't follow your reasoning, so I took a closer look at the source code myself. I agree now that there is no added risk for a buffer overflow because /dev/ + 1 character is still smaller than /dev/cdroms/ . 2. The package has a high popcon. Have you thoroughly tested the resulting package ? I would feel more comfortable if you would confirm that on bug 719110. This is something I cannot really deeply test That answers my question. I'll test this myself before uploading. I see now that it's possible to test this on Debian by renaming /dev/cdrom to /dev/cdrom3 or so. 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/20140224203438.ga4...@master.debian.org
review tomcat7 7.0.28-4+deb7u1 2014-02-17 17:10 at mentors
Hi Emmanuel, Why is the .orig.tar.gz not identical to the one already in stable ? $ md5sum tomcat7_7.0.28.orig.tar.gz old/tomcat7_7.0.28.orig.tar.gz 6c58a3910c26d9cc7c8bedaf187cb63a tomcat7_7.0.28.orig.tar.gz c33dcbc69a1877d41b4ca4ae7a7c621b old/tomcat7_7.0.28.orig.tar.gz 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/20140223090223.ga14...@master.debian.org
review eject 2.1.5+deb1+cvs20081104-13.1 2014-02-14 21:29
Hi Gianfranco, I have two questions for you. 1. The patch makes the program use one additional position of the memory pointed to by buf. Are you sure that there will be no buffer overflow for any value of name without replacing 14 by 15 in the allocation ? 2. The package has a high popcon. Have you thoroughly tested the resulting package ? I would feel more comfortable if you would confirm that on bug 719110. 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/20140223093920.gc14...@master.debian.org
Re: gengetopt - Is this a +dfsg case?
On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 11:58:39AM +0100, Dariusz Dwornikowski wrote: Hi, I am maintaining a great package - zmap. It depends, for building only, on gengetopt [1] to generate main.c stub for command line arguments handling. However gengetopt was removed from testing due to [2], it is only in unstable for now. This blocks new zmap versions going to testing. I already contacted the maintainer some time ago asking whether it would be fixed or he needs some help but he has not responded yet. [1] http://packages.qa.debian.org/g/gengetopt.html [2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=708880 My question is, how this situation should be handled, should these manuals be removed and package uploaded as dfsg ? I suggest to add a well-tested patch to the bug, and tag the bug patch. Or the best is to wait for upstream to change the licence. Waiting is usually not the best approach. I am asking out of curiosity, and to know how to handle such situations in the future, I do not want hijack the package from Alessio. How to handle such situations in the future depends on the situations. :-) In this case I suggest ... see above. 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/20140222114258.gb3...@master.debian.org
Re: gengetopt - Is this a +dfsg case?
On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 01:37:13PM +0100, Dariusz Dwornikowski wrote: On 22 February 2014 12:42, Bart Martens ba...@debian.org wrote: On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 11:58:39AM +0100, Dariusz Dwornikowski wrote: Hi, I am maintaining a great package - zmap. It depends, for building only, on gengetopt [1] to generate main.c stub for command line arguments handling. However gengetopt was removed from testing due to [2], it is only in unstable for now. This blocks new zmap versions going to testing. I already contacted the maintainer some time ago asking whether it would be fixed or he needs some help but he has not responded yet. [1] http://packages.qa.debian.org/g/gengetopt.html [2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=708880 My question is, how this situation should be handled, should these manuals be removed and package uploaded as dfsg ? I suggest to add a well-tested patch to the bug, and tag the bug patch. Sorry, quite new to this. Patch what ? A source package, an orig tarball ? Along with the debian/ directory ? Should the patch remove the files and change the changelog to add dfsg tag ? I meant a patch https://www.google.com/search?q=diff+patch containing all the changes to the gengetopt source package https://wiki.debian.org/SourcePackage you would apply if you would be the gengetopt package maintainer to fix the bug holding back zmap. One possible set of changes would be what you described (should these manuals be removed and package uploaded as dfsg). Another option would be to move the package to section non-free, but then zmap would need to move to section contrib, and that's something you may not prefer. 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/2014021456.ga25...@master.debian.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#733455: closed by Bart Martens ba...@quantz.debian.org (closing RFS: grap/1.44-1 [ITA])
On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 01:26:09PM +0100, matus valo wrote: Hi, I had problems to re-upload new version of package, see: https://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2014/01/msg00112.html Now, It is uploaded again on mentors.debian.net. Is it possible to reopen bug? Yes, you can do that. http://www.debian.org/Bugs/server-control 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/20140107190111.ga12...@master.debian.org
Re: Gitorious and debian/watch file
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 05:19:12PM +0200, Blanc Pierre wrote: Hello, I need help to create a wonderful watch file. The source is gitorious. I read again and again this page : https://wiki.debian.org/debian/watch#Gitorious I did test again and again but nothing works. I did also search on codesearch.debian.net from #debian-mentors advice. And I saw, I was not alone. I try here, maybe someone has successful with watch file and Gitorious symbiosis. On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 05:33:04PM +0200, Pierre Blanc wrote: It's a general question non specific to my package :) The url is https://gitorious.org/osm-c-tools/osmctools I suggest to use this : | version=3 | opts=filenamemangle=s/\S*download=//g \ | http://qa.debian.org/cgi-bin/fakeupstream.cgi?upstream=gitorious/osm-c-tools/osmctools \ | .*=osmctools(?:[_\-]v?|)(\d[^\s/]*)\.(?:tar\.xz|txz|tar\.bz2|tbz2|tar\.gz|tgz) 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/20131125203822.ga29...@master.debian.org
Bug#728716: RFS: xchroot/2.3.3-3 [ITP] -- extended chroot with X11/Xorg forwarding and aufs/unionfs support for read only roots
Hi Elmar, It's OK that you write your own non-free license, but this license in particular has, in my opinion, too many serious flaws to allow it in section non-free. I suggest to get professional legal advice or to use an existing well-known license. 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/20131112074119.ga13...@master.debian.org
Re: Watch file help needed
On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 07:27:40PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi, rel2gpx was moved to a new location http://blog.velocarte66.fr/?q=de/node/170 I tried to adapt the watch file to http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-grass/rel2gpx.git;a=commitdiff;h=HEAD but this does not work as expected. Any hint? Yes, I suggest to use this : | version=3 | opts=uversionmangle=s/^(0)(\d\d)$/$1.$2/ \ | http://blog.velocarte66.fr/?q=de/node/170 \ | (?:|.*/)rel2gpx(?:[_\-]v?|)(\d[^\s/]*)\.(?:tar\.xz|txz|tar\.bz2|tbz2|tar\.gz|tgz) 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/20131020180844.ga19...@master.debian.org
Bug#706556: RFS: decibel-audio-player
Hi Paolo, Do you intend to adopt this package (to maintain it for a longer time) or do you just want to do one update now ? Depending on that, you should retitle bug 614275 from O to ITA and set yourself as the owner, or modify the package at mentors to include QA upload. 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/20130803062259.gh4...@master.debian.org
Bug#707163: RFS: nfsen
Hi Matt, If you intend to package nfsen then please retitle bug 472666 from RFP to ITP and set yourself as the owner. 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/20130511043740.gb26...@master.debian.org
Re: ITP: grokmirror and looking for sponsor
On Thu, May 09, 2013 at 02:17:51AM -0300, Adrian Alves wrote: Hey guys am about to start with the debian developer process I need an sponsor to start with my pkg grokmirror, I already submitted an ITP didnt get the number of ITP yet but am looking for a mentor and sponsor to guide me in all this process. I suggest that you upload your package to mentors.debian.net and mark it needs sponsor = yes. 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/20130509074124.ga27...@master.debian.org
Bug#704425: review for RFS sysadmin-guide
Hi Miklos, On your package at mentors uploaded there on 2013-02-21 22:01 : http://mentors.debian.net/package/sysadmin-guide The directory debian.orig shouldn't be there. I suggest to use debhelper and compat higher than 8. I suggest to remove this from debian/copyright, because such information is already in debian/changelog : | In late 2012, package was orphaned and it was taken ownership by Miklos Quartus | in...@miklos.info and improved the packaging using debhelper on Sun Jan 6 | 16:57:10 GMT 2013. You must not remove the previous Debian package maintainer's copyright notice and license if you still use parts of it. It's OK to add your own copyright notice and license. 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/20130505055931.ge8...@master.debian.org
Bug#702553: RFS powder
Hi Steven, On your package at mentors uploaded there on 2013-02-27 10:09 : http://mentors.debian.net/package/powder It has almost no changes with the package already in Debian. I suggest to not upload this package now until you can add more useful changes. 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/20130505054657.gd8...@master.debian.org
Re: Changelog entry for bug workaround but no real fix?
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 12:02:50PM +0200, Gert Wollny wrote: Dear all, a bug [1] was files against the the package (mia) I'm preparing that can not really be fixed within this package, because the actual bug [2] is in another, required package. Considering the ongoing freeze of wheezy, [2] may not be fixed soon, but I have a workaround in mia, that makes [1] disappear. Somehow Closing the bug doesn't sound right, because the problem is still persistent. I also set [1] blocked by [2]. [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=705385 [2] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=705495 So my question is: How would I mark this in the changelog of a new upload, In such cases I write see: #nn instead of closes: #nn, and so far nobody complained about this approach. :-) and in what way should I comment this in the bug report (beyond of what I already commented)? I would write something like I included a temporary workaround for this bug in mia version 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/20130418174709.ga18...@master.debian.org
Re: new ebtables upload
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 11:28:41PM +0100, William Dauchy wrote: ok just seen the rules modifications from today. http://release.debian.org/wheezy/freeze_policy.html This will unfortunately go in unstable only. Feel sorry not having done the work before. I couldn't resist having a quick look now. :-) I suggest to ask debian-release for a pre-approval for wheezy with a debdiff including all three changes. So I suggest to keep the flag needs sponsor at mentors on no for now. Fixing 697276 (kmod) looks like a safe change that should be fixed in wheezy. On bug 697275 I'm not sure, so you should doublecheck and doubletest that the change does not change anything that has been fine in testing during the freeze so far. Make sure that there's no regression at all. Bug 684592 should really be fixed in wheezy, so it's even worth a separate upload for wheezy in my opinion. Depending on the outcome of debian-release you can go ahead with requesting sponsorship for this package as-is (set needs sponsor to yes) or do a separate upload for wheezy with reduced changes you got pre-approval for. Other changes are best uploaded to experimental, not to unstable, so that unstable remains available for additional uploads for wheezy. More questions best via debian-mentors, so other sponsors can help you faster than I can. 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/20130321061013.ge28...@master.debian.org
Re: new ebtables upload
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 04:30:53PM +0100, William Dauchy wrote: Hi Bart, Back in June 2012, you have been sponsoring me to upload a new ebtables package. Since then, I'm now a co maintainer of the ebtables packages. I have now a new package fixing several open bugs. Am I supposed to upload it on mentors.debian.org or is there another way when being a co-maintainer ? There are different options. One option is what you wrote. A second option is that you and Jochen commit the changes in a version control system (cvs, svn, git, ...) that Jochen always does the uploads. A third option is to get upload rights as a DM or DD. 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/20130315170358.gb6...@master.debian.org
Re: Why is it so hard to get sponsors.....?
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 11:07:11PM +, Philip Ashmore wrote: On 26/02/13 21:51, Arno Töll wrote: Hi, On 26.02.2013 22:31, W. van den Akker wrote: I understand [1] and [2]. I meant uploading to unstable and not testing. But none of the DD was ever answering the emails.. Be patient and don't give up. I know this can be frustrating and annoying, and we're slowly trying to improve the situation, but we all agree the situation is still all but optimal to sponsorees. Moreover, personally I'm always keen to hear about ideas how to improve the situation though. So let us know if you got good ideas. While harsh reality dictates that sponsors will spend their time however they wish, including only sponsoring packages that interest them or have some other relevance, True. it might be more encouraging if sponsorees could know where they stand apart from the wall of silence we have now. Also true. First - a weighted sponsorship priority queue - all packages get a rating and higher-rated packages will get sponsored sooner than others. Priorities are different per sponsor. There's no overall priority. Also, setting priorities and publishing them, costs time, in my opinion better spent on sponsoring the packages. Everyone who wants a sponsor for a package will see their package, its position in the queue, and its weighting. Your call is important to us - you are 15th in the queue is better than please hold. I agree that this would be nice for who waits for a sponsor. Second - a weighting web interface - even if a sponsor can't/wont sponsor a package they can rate it positively or negatively. This would take seconds with the right web interface, comments optional. Now that is a good idea. Voting up or down with one click costs little time. Third, unless a package reaches some negative weighting value which marks it as un-sponsor-able, it will eventually get packaged. No promises that a package will get sponsored. The ranking reflects the voting up or down, but it doesn't mean that the top package will be sponsored first. Sponsoring still depends on the individual sponsor deciding that the package is good for upload. This way, sponsors get to package what they like most of the time, with the occasional package they might prefer not to, for Debians sake. If the individual sponsors want to do this. It's still volunteering work. 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/20130227063624.gb3...@master.debian.org
Re: Watch file warning from mentors website
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 06:09:01PM +1100, Scott Leggett wrote: Hi, I've got an issue with watch file usage in some software I'm trying to package ( https://mentors.debian.net/package/compton ). Upstream does not release tarballs, instead preferring packagers to build straight from git. I've followed the advice of the lintian report for debian-watch-file-is-missing, and created a watch file with a few comments explaining the situation. It looks like this: #version=3 #http://githubredir.debian.net/github/chjj/compton (.*).tar.gz # Upstream currently does not release tarballs or even tag releases, instead # preferring packagers to work straight from git. # When this situation improves, the watch lines above should work and this # comment block can be removed. See https://github.com/chjj/compton/issues/71 The redirector githubredir is obsolete, because github allows uscan now. It's possible that githubredir is still documented in some versions of man uscan. You can choose to add a comments-only watch file or to leave out the watch file and ignore the lintian message. This passes lintian fine locally, but when uploaded the mentors website complains that A watch file is present but doesn't work (see the link to my package above). You can ignore that. I guess mentors doensn't check for comments-only watch files. Is there something I can fix in the watch file, At first site upstream doesn't support uscan, so no. or is the mentors website complaining unnecessarily? In my opinion, yes. It seems strange that the website would complain while lintian does not. I guess mentors doesn't use lintian to check the watch file, hence the different behavior. 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/20130226075614.ga29...@master.debian.org
Re: uscan: limit search to sourceforge directory?
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 07:09:46PM +0100, Felix Natter wrote: I am using this debian/watch file for 'freeplane': (...) Is there a way to limit the search of the sf redirector to a directory, i.e. http://sourceforge.net/projects/freeplane/files/freeplane%20stable/ (or a solution without the sf redirector?) Is this what you're looking for ? http://qa.debian.org/cgi-bin/watchfile.cgi?package=freeplane 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/20130223183018.ga26...@master.debian.org
Re: uscan: limit search to sourceforge directory?
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 08:23:55PM +0100, Felix Natter wrote: Bart Martens ba...@debian.org writes: hi Bart, On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 07:09:46PM +0100, Felix Natter wrote: I am using this debian/watch file for 'freeplane': (...) Is there a way to limit the search of the sf redirector to a directory, i.e. http://sourceforge.net/projects/freeplane/files/freeplane%20stable/ (or a solution without the sf redirector?) Is this what you're looking for ? http://qa.debian.org/cgi-bin/watchfile.cgi?package=freeplane This works great, thank you! OK. Just to understand this: Where does watchfile.cgi pull this from? See : http://wiki.debian.org/qa.debian.org/HowToHelpWithFixingWatchFiles I think you wrote it by hand, didn't you? Yes. 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/20130223223727.ga12...@master.debian.org
Bug#701021: RFS: tinywm
retitle 701021 RFS: tinywm/1.3+git11122012.b663a26b83-1 stop (Removing [NMU] from the title.) Hi Mateusz, Did you get permission from Nobuhiro Iwamatsu to update tinywm and to add yourself to Uploaders ? 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/2013001422.gd3...@master.debian.org
Re: Watch file help needed
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 04:39:11PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi, the watch file of the prospective package meme[1] is reporting a new [1] svn://svn.debian.org/debian-med/trunk/packages/meme/trunk version but fails to download the latest version (4.9.0.4). It was working nicely with version 4.9.0.3. I just get: $ uscan --verbose --force-download ... 3.5.1/meme_3.5.1.tar.gz 3.5.0/meme_3.5.0.tar.gz Newest version on remote site is 4.9.0.4, local version is 4.9.0.3 = Forcing download as requested -- Downloading updated package meme_4.9.0_4.tar.gz uscan warning: In directory ., downloading ftp://ftp.ebi.edu.au/pub/software/MEME/index.html4.9.0/meme_4.9.0_4.tar.gz failed: 404 Can't chdir to index.html4.9.0 -- Scan finished I tried some downloadurlmangle replacements with no effect at all. Any hint would be welcome I suggest to use this : version=3 opts=uversionmangle=s/_/./g \ http://ebi.edu.au/ftp/software/MEME/index.html .*/meme[_\-](\d.*)\.(?:tgz|tbz2|txz|tar\.(?:gz|bz2|xz)) 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/20130213174019.gb8...@master.debian.org
Re: want to get involved to fix blt package
Hi Paul, On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 09:26:16PM -0600, Paul Johnson wrote: I just kicked up some dust about getting the blt package fixed for Wheezy. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=524149 The conclusion there is if you want it fixed, go fix it. I say OK! I say great ! blt is abandoned, I have been fixing it for a couple of years. What next. You can retitle bug 664092 to ITA and set yourself as the owner. Then you can upload your package to mentors.debian.net and mark the package needs sponsor = yes. 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/20130122070853.ga24...@master.debian.org
Re: Fwd: Re: Bug#694418: ITP: fits ... help needed for watch file
Hi Florian, On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 06:08:58PM +0100, Florian Rothmaier wrote: Even though Aaron Ucko was very kind and helpful, I still have some problems to provide a correct watch file for my libfits-java package Maybe this is what you're looking for ? | version=3 | opts=downloadurlmangle=s%$%fits_src.jar% \ | http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/heasarc/fits/java/v(\d.*)/ v(\d.*)/ 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/20130103173920.ga10...@master.debian.org
how to add an additional license to the debian/copyright file (Re: License Question)
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 10:06:58AM -0500, Daniel Echeverry wrote: Hi, I am currently working on this bug [1], the package has a licensed font with this text [2]. Can you tell me how I define this license in debian/copyright file? Please add CC to me, I'm not subscribed to the list Thank you very much! [1]: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=696920 [2]: http://paste.debian.net/220092/ This appears to be a question not about the license itself but about how to add the license in debian/copyright. That's not a question for debian-legal but rather for debian-mentors. So I answer with debian-mentors in cc. The machine-readable format for debian/copyright is optional. http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-docs.html#s-copyrightfile Also this debian/copyright file doesn't seem to conform to the machine-readable format. So you can simply add the license to debian/copyright, I suggest near the end of debian/copyright. I don't use the machine-readable format because it's more work to write a debian/copyright file, and I haven't seen any benefits so far. 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/20121229153402.gb17...@master.debian.org
Re: Interested in adopting the premake package
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 12:34:25PM +1100, Cameron Hart wrote: I have contacted the current maintainer and they're OK with me adopting the package. Does the current maintainer need to Orphan/RTA the package first or can I just file a new ITA bug? If there is an agreement then you can simply submit an ITA, but please mention the agreement on the ITA. I've been looking at various wiki pages and existing ITA bugs but they're generally renaming an existing O or RTA bug. Usually an ITA is a retitled O or RFA (not RTA). If creating a new ITA bug do I specify the package to be premake or wnpp? The ITA must be assigned to pseudo-package wnpp. Do I need to specify myself as owner? Yes. 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/20121220062043.gb19...@master.debian.org
Bug#694872: Why was this bug closed?
On Sun, Dec 02, 2012 at 12:59:44PM +0100, Ivo De Decker wrote: On Sun, Dec 02, 2012 at 11:45:08AM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2012 04:20:40 + From: Bart Martens ba...@quantz.debian.org To: 694872-d...@bugs.debian.org Subject: closing RFS: lftp/4.3.8-1.1 [NMU] [RC] Package lftp has been removed from mentors. lftp hasn't been uploaded or removed, so this bug shouldn't be closed. It might be a problem is some script, because mentors has 2 versions of lftp: a version for sid, and a version for testing-proposed-updates. I agree that closing this RFS with has been removed from mentors was an error in my script. Thanks for telling me this and for reopening this RFS. However, are you sure that a package for t-p-u should have a version like 4.3.8-1.1 ? Shouldn't it be a version with +deb70u1 or some variant of that for an NMU ? 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/20121202170824.ga11...@master.debian.org
polipo 1.0.4.1-2 2012-11-22 19:14
Hi Rolf, I had a look at this package: http://mentors.debian.net/package/polipo Looks like a good maintenance update, and uploading this to experimental seems the best choice since there are still important bugs open that could be fixed in wheezy via unstable. How is progress on bugs 610199, 655851 and 684742 ? Any chance to get them fixed in wheezy ? 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/20121129063354.ga24...@master.debian.org
Re: Deb Package Question
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 07:41:00PM -0800, AllowOverride wrote: Hello, I am trying to package up a folder that has two more folders and is a self contained program. i have tried debuild, dpkg-buildpackage, all sorts of deb build this and thats, and well its really hard to package up something. now im sure it's easy for some of you, but remember this is a program that runs out of a folder, has not real deps it doesn't satisfy within its self and dir. what is the basic syntax to use to take this program and make it a .deb where dpkg -i some.deb will install in /usr/local/etc pretty simple eh? let's find out.. suggestions? Have you tried the Debian New Maintainers' Guide ? http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/index.en.html 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/20121127055316.gb24...@master.debian.org
Re: wmtime 1.0b2-14 2012-11-23 22:50
Hi Doug, On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 06:16:08AM +, Doug Torrance wrote: I've combined all of the changelog entries. This has the effect of the changelog skipping from 1.0b2-10 straight to 1.0b2-15. Is this okay? It's not a problem. Please let me know if you have any more suggestions! You are making good progress, but we aren't there yet, so here are more suggestions : Debian-policy http://packages.qa.debian.org/d/debian-policy.html is now 3.9.4.0, and we usually only mention the three first parts of the version number, so I'd suggest to use 3.9.4 in debian/control. Two minor errors in debian/patches/upstream_changes are that upgradian should probably be upgrading, and debian/compat is actually increased from 4 to 9, not from 7 to 9. About simpifying debian/rules I suggest that you have a look at the attached file wmtime_simplified_rules.diff. The file debian/copyright is not complete and accurate. You may want to your website as the current download location. The license in general is GPL2, not GPL2+, see README and COPYING. The file wmgeneral/misc.c is copyrighted by someone else, with GPL2+ as the license. Also the files wmgeneral/list.c and wmgeneral/list.h are copyrighted by someone else, with GPL2+ as the license, but also with an exception. The debian/copyright file should point to /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-2, not /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL. And you may want to add copyright and license information for the debian packaging. Lintian produced these messages: W: wmtime source: package-needs-versioned-debhelper-build-depends 9 W: wmtime: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/wmtime W: wmtime: hardening-no-fortify-functions usr/bin/wmtime Which version of lintian did you use ? You should always use the newest version from unstable. Also the build environment should only have packages from unstable. Regards, Bart Martens diff -ruN mentors/wmtime-1.0b2/debian/control wmtime-1.0b2/debian/control --- mentors/wmtime-1.0b2/debian/control 2012-11-23 21:33:17.0 + +++ wmtime-1.0b2/debian/control 2012-11-25 12:32:39.0 + @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ Section: x11 Priority: optional Maintainer: Doug Torrance profz...@hotmail.com -Build-Depends: debhelper (= 7), libx11-dev, libxpm-dev, libxext-dev +Build-Depends: debhelper (= 9), libx11-dev, libxpm-dev, libxext-dev Standards-Version: 3.9.3 Homepage: http://wmaker.friedcheese.org Vcs-Browser: http://repo.or.cz/r/dockapps.git diff -ruN mentors/wmtime-1.0b2/debian/install wmtime-1.0b2/debian/install --- mentors/wmtime-1.0b2/debian/install 1970-01-01 00:00:00.0 + +++ wmtime-1.0b2/debian/install 2012-11-25 12:25:02.0 + @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +wmtime/wmtime usr/bin/ diff -ruN mentors/wmtime-1.0b2/debian/rules wmtime-1.0b2/debian/rules --- mentors/wmtime-1.0b2/debian/rules 2012-11-23 21:33:17.0 + +++ wmtime-1.0b2/debian/rules 2012-11-25 12:33:05.0 + @@ -1,97 +1,13 @@ #!/usr/bin/make -f -# -# debian/rules file for wmtime. -# Copyright (C) 2003 Software in the Public Interest. -# -# This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify -# it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by -# the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at -# your option) any later version. -# -# This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but -# WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of -# MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU -# General Public License for more details. -# -# You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License -# along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software -# Foundation, Inc., 675 Mass Ave, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA. -# -# Based on the sample debian/rules that uses debhelper. -# GNU copyright 1997 to 1999 by Joey Hess. -# Uncomment this to turn on verbose mode. -#export DH_VERBOSE=1 +%: + dh $@ -ifneq (,$(findstring debug,$(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS))) - CFLAGS += -g -endif -ifeq (,$(findstring nostrip,$(DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS))) - INSTALL_PROGRAM += -s -endif - -build: build-arch build-indep - -build-arch: build-stamp - -build-indep: build-stamp - -build-stamp: - dh_testdir - - cd wmtime; $(MAKE) - - touch build-stamp - -clean: - dh_testdir - dh_testroot - rm -f build-stamp - - -cd wmtime; $(MAKE) clean +override_dh_auto_build: + dh_auto_build + cd wmtime make +override_dh_clean: dh_clean + cd wmtime make clean || true -install: build - dh_testdir - dh_testroot - dh_prep - dh_installdirs - - install -m 755 wmtime/wmtime $(CURDIR)/debian/wmtime/usr/bin - -# Build architecture-independent files here. -binary-indep: build install -# We have nothing to do by default. - -# Build architecture-dependent files here. -binary-arch: build install - dh_testdir - dh_testroot - dh_installdebconf - dh_installdocs - dh_installexamples - dh_installmenu -# dh_installlogrotate -# dh_installemacsen -# dh_installpam -# dh_installmime -# dh_installinit -# dh_installcron
subdownloader 2.0.14-1.1 2012-11-10 11:52
Hi Emilien, I had a look at this package : http://mentors.debian.net/package/subdownloader Changing the source format in an NMU is usually not wanted, and the patch is very small, so you could simply add the change to gui/main.py and keep the old source format. On the other hand, I doubt that Marco Rodrigues is still maintaining this package, so maybe this shouldn't be an NMU. 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/20121124101239.gg9...@master.debian.org
Re: subdownloader 2.0.14-1.1 2012-11-10 11:52
On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 10:12:39AM +, Bart Martens wrote: Hi Emilien, I had a look at this package : http://mentors.debian.net/package/subdownloader Changing the source format in an NMU is usually not wanted, and the patch is very small, so you could simply add the change to gui/main.py and keep the old source format. On the other hand, I doubt that Marco Rodrigues is still maintaining this package, so maybe this shouldn't be an NMU. Adding to what I wrote before : This package is no longer in testing, so fixing the bug in wheezy is probably no longer in scope. According to what I read on bug 687126, bug 606993 has been fixed upstream, so I guess the best first step for this package is to upload the newer upstream release to unstable, via a QA upload, or by someone adopting the package with an ITA. 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/20121124103533.gm9...@master.debian.org
Bug#693495: RFS: wmtime/1.0b2-13 2012-11-20 13:32
Hi Doug, The file wmtime_1.0b2.orig.tar.gz at mentors is not identical to the one in Debian. What is debian/0001-Packaging-for-Debian.patch for ? The changelog entry of 1.0b2-13 Rebuilding source package correctly is not useful if you didn't change the source package. The homepage in the Homepage field is not useful since it states that http://packages.qa.debian.org/w/wmtime.html is the (home) website, and the version available for download is older than the newest already in Debian. I suggest to not use this website in the Homepage field, and also not in debian/watch. Using 7 in debian/compat is quite low nowadays. Some changes are not mentioned in debian/changelog, for example replacing dh_clean by dh_prep. Isn't it better to use a higher debian/compat number so that debian/rules can be simplified instead ? I suggest to add the fixes for bugs 639626 and 661843 in debian/patches. 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/20121123175450.gb32...@master.debian.org
wmtime 1.0b2-14 2012-11-23 22:50
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 10:56:20PM +, Doug Torrance wrote: bartm wrote on 23 Nov 2012 17:54 : The file wmtime_1.0b2.orig.tar.gz at mentors is not identical to the one in Debian. What is debian/0001-Packaging-for-Debian.patch for ? The changelog entry of 1.0b2-13 Rebuilding source package correctly is not useful if you didn't change the source package. The homepage in the Homepage field is not useful since it states that http://packages.qa.debian.org/w/wmtime.html is the (home) website, and the version available for download is older than the newest already in Debian. I suggest to not use this website in the Homepage field, and also not in debian/watch. Using 7 in debian/compat is quite low nowadays. Some changes are not mentioned in debian/changelog, for example replacing dh_clean by dh_prep. Isn't it better to use a higher debian/compat number so that debian/rules can be simplified instead ? I suggest to add the fixes for bugs 639626 and 661843 in debian/patches. Thank you so much for your input. This is my first attempt at maintaining a Debian package, so I truly appreciate it! I guessed already that you are a beginner. Your positive attitude makes it a pleasure to give review comments. Feel free to ask questions on debian-mentors@lists.debian.org about Debian packaging. I believe that I have made of all the changes that you outlined. Not yet all of them, but you're making progress. I've uploaded a new source package (wmtime-1.0b2-14) to mentors.debian.net if you would be interested in taking a look. I suggest to merge the changelog entries from 1.0b2-11 to 1.0b2-14, although it is not really an error to use multiple entries. The entry Rebuilt source package is still in the changelog, and this makes no sense because there were no changes to the source package involved. I see that debian/compat still has 7 while debian/patches/upstream_changes mentions 9. If you can recognize separate changes from the past, then separate patches is slightly better than one upstream_changes patch, although I understand you may not want to do that effort. The Homepage http://wmaker.friedcheese.org/ is by the Debian maintainer for the wmtime package so that's probably Paul Harris who is no longer maintaining the Debian package, so I suggest to not use this website in Homepage and debian/watch either. If wmtime no longer has any upstream maintainer, then you will in fact become the upstream maintainer. Then you are free to make a new upstream homepage, or to simply not use the field Homepage in debian/control and not use a debian/watch file. The file debian/patches/series only mentions upstream_changes so the other patches are not used, meaning that the bugs are probably not really fixed. Did you test the resulting binary package ? 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/20121124073459.gd9...@master.debian.org
polipo 1.0.4.1-2 2012-11-19 17:17
Hi Rolf, I got this message when downloading the package from mentors, so the orig file at mentors is not identical to the one already in Debian : | dget: removing polipo_1.0.4.1.orig.tar.gz (md5sum does not match) I suggest to update the debian/watch file to this : | version=3 | opts=uversionmangle=s/^200\d*$/0.0.$1/ \ | http://freehaven.net/~chrisd/polipo/polipo-(\d.*)\.(?:tgz|tar\.(?:gz|bz2|xz)) 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/20121122081248.gc14...@master.debian.org
Bug#684529: turnserver 0.7.2-1 or 0.7-1
Hi Daniel, I see that turnserver 0.7.2-1 is in NEW, but you are still requesting sponsorship for turnserver 0.7-1 via mentors and RFS 684529. Intentional ? Or can the RFS be closed and will you remove turnserver 0.7-1 from mentors ? http://ftp-master.debian.org/new/turnserver_0.7.2-1.html http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=684529 http://mentors.debian.net/package/turnserver 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/20121122072814.ga14...@master.debian.org
Bug#693778: RFS: myspell-el-gr/0.8-2 2012-11-20 09:20
Hi Nick, I had a look at this package. I suggest to download http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/1.1/index.txt and add the text in debian/copyright. 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/20121122074518.gb14...@master.debian.org
Re: Maintainer address for collab-maint team maintained packages
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 03:28:55PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote: Hi, Hi Marc, I am participating in a team-maintained package which is hosted on collab-maint. Which package ? We would like to have the Maintainer: address of that package to forward to all members of the team, Why would you want to do that ? I mean, is the package you work on related to all other maintainers maintaining other packages in collab-maint ? http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/CollabMaint not connected to any other teams preferably by setting an address there that forwards to the PTS, having team members and other interested parties subscribed there. This seems to be harder to do than I imagined. package@packages.qa.debian.org wants a certain header to be set for the message to be forwarded. package@packages.debian.org seems to add that header automatically before forwarding to the PTS, but using that address as Maintainer: is a lintian _error_ (not even a warning) (Severity: serious, Certainty: certain). Would modifying lintian be a solution for your problem ? There do not seem to be public mailing lists on the collab-maint Alioth project. Does this one not work ? http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/collab-maint-devel To post a message to all the list members, send email to collab-maint-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org. Do we really need to create a dedicated Alioth project just to get a mailing list which can be used as Maintainer? Or am I missing a policy-compliant possibility to do this with available resources? I agree that creating an Alioth project just for the mailing list feels somewhat uncomfortable. 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/20121119173458.ga28...@master.debian.org
Re: Maintainer address for collab-maint team maintained packages
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 06:51:08PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote: On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 05:34:58PM +, Bart Martens wrote: On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 03:28:55PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote: I am participating in a team-maintained package which is hosted on collab-maint. Which package ? If that has anything to do with it, it's libopendbx, which has not yet been pushed to collab-maint. We would like to have the Maintainer: address of that package to forward to all members of the team, Why would you want to do that ? I mean, is the package you work on related to all other maintainers maintaining other packages in collab-maint ? Misunderstanding, either accidental or deliberate. I want the Maintainer address to forward to all people listed in Uploaders: of the respective package, not to all 519 members of the collab-maint Alioth project. I am not out of my mind. Accidental misunderstanding. I understood all members of the team as all members of collab-maint, and now I understand it as the co-maintainers of the package. 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/20121119192007.ga18...@master.debian.org
Re: Once more: Need help updating my DM upload permissions
Hi Thomas, On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 10:32:29AM +0100, Thomas Friedrichsmeier wrote: So far the only result has been a new bug report against my package, and some controversy around how to handle this The easy way would have been to upload a fix for bug 689982 in unstable and request an unblock. Instead you questioned and lowered the severity of the bug, and uploaded a newer upstream release to unstable, so now it's more difficult to get the bug fixed in wheezy. This would have been prevented via sponsorship. As I wrote before on 2 Nov 2012, on copyright and licenses you seem to need a sponsor. Other than that it is possible that you are doing excellent work on the package rkward. 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/20121116101936.ga18...@master.debian.org
Re: Once more: Need help updating my DM upload permissions
Hi Thomas, On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 02:09:52PM +0100, Thomas Friedrichsmeier wrote: Up to this point, I had *no* indication, whatsoever, that you did not agree with my assessment. The initial severity could have been such indication. - I did receive a reply, this time. In entirety (omitting salutation, citation, and signature) it was The issue has not yet been fixed in wheezy. The part omitting salutation, citation, and signature is not true. - As a reaction to this, you *finally* cared to give a rough explanation of your point of view, in that mail on Nov, 2, you are referring to. I replied, not finally but on the same day, to your specific message of November 2th. https://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2012/11/msg00026.html Do you think that Henrique Holschuh and Steve Langasek seem to need a sponsor? I don't think so. Or did you not read the other replies on debian-policy? I'm not sure wether I've read every reply on that list. Or did you fail to acknowledge that these diverged from your point of view? DDs have different opinions all the time. No, your interpretation of policy on this point is *not* the one and only possible reading. Some readers might argue that I'm reading verbatim copy too verbatimly. :-) And, disagreeing with your reading, I seem to find myself in prominent company. It is possible that you have found others agreeing with your view on things. And also, I do think that if you do hold a firm opinion on a subject, and you do care about it, then you should communicate that a bit sooner, and a bit more clearly. That, too is a question of respect and responsibility - towards a random DM as much as to the project. You seem to have a strong opinion on how I should communicate in Debian. :-) OK, back to what (in my opinion) matters : You are in the process of fixing bug 689982 in wheezy, so that's covered for now. And, at this point I don't renew your DM upload permissions for the reason I explained, and other than that it is possible that you are doing excellent work on the package rkward. 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/20121116155634.gd18...@master.debian.org
Bug#681020: radeontop
Hi John, I see that radeontop 0.6-1 is in NEW : http://ftp-master.debian.org/new/radeontop_0.6-1.html But you are still requesting sponsorship for radeontop 0.5.4.1-1 : http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=681020 http://mentors.debian.net/package/radeontop Intentional ? Or can the RFS be closed and will you remove radeontop 0.5.4.1-1 from mentors ? 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/20121116171505.ge18...@master.debian.org
dm upload permissions
Hello, As I wrote earlier on debian-devel [1] I have a few reports [2] about DM upload permissions. According to the announcement [3] the permissions only via DMUA=yes will be revoked on 24th of November 2012, and that date is coming near now. [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/09/msg00645.html [2] http://qa.debian.org/~bartm/dm-permissions/ [3] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2012/09/msg8.html At this point 135 DMs would loose their DM upload permissions for 774 packages. That is more than I expected. So it is possible that we'll get an increase of sponsorship requests and DM upload permissions renewal requests on debian-mentors after 24th of November 2012. (That's why I send this to debian-mentors now.) A random example of an active DM is Jaromír Mikeš, with a recent upload of package libltc. This situation also reveals unmaintained packages that should be marked as orphaned. (That's why I send this to debian-qa now.) A random example of a package that looks pretty unmaintained at this point is tinymux. 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/20121117072914.ga24...@master.debian.org
Bug#691907: RFS: ovito/1.1.0-1
On Sun, Nov 04, 2012 at 11:38:57AM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote: * Bart Martens ba...@debian.org, 2012-11-04, 05:07: That should have been s/Tags/Usertags/, I guess? It it's not for wheezy, then distribution in the changelog should be set to experimental rather than unstable. The freeze policy does not forbid that this package is uploaded to unstable even if it is not for wheezy. Well, of course it does not. But that doesn't make uploading to unstable a good idea. Please also note that since many updates (hopefully, the vast majority) will still be going in through unstable, major changes in unstable right now can disrupt efforts to get RC bugs fixed. We don't ask you not to make changes in unstable, but we do ask that you be aware of the effects your changes can have -- especially if you maintain a library. Please continue to keep disruptive changes out of unstable and continue making use of experimental where appropriate. Note that you can stage NEW uploads in experimental to avoid disruption in unstable. So why would uploading this package to unstable not be a good idea ? 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/20121104112014.ga6...@master.debian.org
supertransball2 at mentors 2012-11-01 16:38
Hi Markus, I read that the license is GPL 2, but I don't read or (at your option) any later version. Where did you read that ? Why experimental and not unstable ? I'm not sure about merge the old patches into one. Are you sure that this is an improvement ? Why base the debian/watch file on stransball2-v15-windows.zip and not on stransball2-v15-source.zip ? 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/20121103195255.gb10...@master.debian.org
Bug#691780: RFS: imagemagick
Hi Bastien, About imagemagick at mentors 2012-10-24 10:30. http://mentors.debian.net/package/imagemagick I read on the RFS before end of freeze, fix a memory leak and yes for wheezy and asap due to security problem. But the package doesn't seem to close any bug in the bts. I don't think that this conforms to the freeze policy. http://release.debian.org/wheezy/freeze_policy.html 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/20121103200926.gc10...@master.debian.org
Bug#691907: RFS: ovito/1.1.0-1
On Sat, Nov 03, 2012 at 11:38:19PM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote: * Pekko Metsä pjme...@gmail.com, 2012-10-31, 11:20: (...) That should have been s/Tags/Usertags/, I guess? It it's not for wheezy, then distribution in the changelog should be set to experimental rather than unstable. The freeze policy does not forbid that this package is uploaded to unstable even if it is not for wheezy. dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/o/ovito/ovito_1.1.0-1.dsc Changes since the last upload: * New upstream release. AFAICS upstream does not offer source tarball for downloads. (Ugh!) How was the .orig.tar.xz created then? http://www.ovito.org/manual/installation.getting_the_source.html https://ovito.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/ovito/tags/release-1.1.0/ I have verified the .orig.tar.xz earlier, and this one is OK: ab47bb43363ed75ba0d409b2cb2963f6 ovito_1.1.0.orig.tar.xz 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/20121104050720.gb22...@master.debian.org
Bug#686070: libpam-ssh/1.92-15
Hi Jerome, On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 04:33:06PM +0100, Jerome BENOIT wrote: On 31/10/12 14:36, Thibaut Paumard wrote: package sponsorship-requests user sponsorship-reque...@packages.debian.org usertags 686070 - not-fit-for-wheezy thanks I'm removing the not-fit-for-wheezy tag since Thomas claims to have improved on that matter. It still have the tag `not-fit-for-wheezy'. Currently standing decision by debian-release : http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=10;bug=691988 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/20121102162042.ga30...@master.debian.org
Re: Ping: Need help updating upload permissions
On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 10:25:22AM +0100, Thomas Friedrichsmeier wrote: Hi! Hello Thomas, I am a Debian Maintainer, working on a single package, rkward[1]. Some three weeks ago I posted to this list[2], asking for help adjusting my upload permissions to the new management interface[3] (for details on what I need, and why, refer to [2]). [1]: http://packages.qa.debian.org/r/rkward.html [2]: https://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2012/10/msg00107.html [3]: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2012/09/msg8.html The only response that I got was one new issue report[4] my package. I have since fixed the issue in unstable, and contacted the reporter, who - in my reading - seemed to imply that he would be willing to update my upload permissions, once the bug was dealt with. This has not happened. [4]: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=689982 I didn't mean to imply that. My *guess* is that the reporter is not happy with the way I have handled the issue, in particular perhaps with my assessment of the bug's severity[5], [5]: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=12;bug=689982 True. and my resulting conclusion that the issue need not, and in fact cannot[6] be addressed for wheezy, any more. [6]: http://release.debian.org/wheezy/freeze_policy.html The bug can still be fixed in wheezy. Again, however, this is just a guess, as our communication has been rather more frugal than I would have hoped for. Haven't I answered all e-mails ? In summary, I would like to renew my call for help. Somebody, please update my upload permissions, or, if you think I do not deserve to keep upload permissions for rkward (for the momment, or for all time), please give me some clear words on why you think so. On copyright and licenses you seem to need a sponsor. Other than that it is possible that you are doing excellent work on the package rkward. I suggest to upload 1:0.5.7-3 with the fix for bug 689982 to unstable and to ask debian-release for an unblock. A different approach could be to agree with debian-release to upload 0.5.7-3 with the fix for bug 689982 to testing-proposed-updates. 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/20121102183453.gc14...@master.debian.org
RFS: inadyn
Hi Timur, I see that you have a few bugs for inadyn tagged pending and that you have requested sponsorship in the past (RFS mentioned on bug 647703) but the package inadyn is no longer at mentors. Where is it now ? 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/20121029085829.gl2...@master.debian.org
Re: Easy bugfix for roxterm: should it go into wheezy?
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 03:24:45PM +, Tony Houghton wrote: A bug has been found in roxterm: https://sourceforge.net/p/roxterm/bugs/88/. I wouldn't consider it a high priority but the fix is very trivial, just adding a single line of code. Should I release this for wheezy? If so, how do I go about it? Should I open a debian bug and give it a certain priority or tag? Do I have to add anything to my RFS? If you wouldn't consider it a high priority then it would probably not match the freeze policy. http://release.debian.org/wheezy/freeze_policy.html 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/20121029160602.ga10...@master.debian.org
Bug#691577: RFS: neverball/1.5.4-6 -- 3D floor-tilting game
Hi Juhani, You wrote on the RFS: team upload (as in Debian Developer's Reference ch 5.11.7) There I read: http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#nmu-team-upload If it conforms with your team's policy without being listed directly as Maintainer or Uploader This seems to be that team's policy: http://wiki.debian.org/Games/Policy and add yourself to the Uploaders field So the team's policy does not seem to allow doing a team upload without adding yourself to Uploaders. But here I read information that appears to contradict with that: http://wiki.debian.org/Games/Guidelines I suggest that you talk to the Debian Games Team to find out what's really the current team's policy on developers-reference 5.11.7, and to update the wiki pages accordingly. Also, I see that the Debian Games Team has its own sponsoring queues, and your package neverball is currently not in the team's sponsoring queue, not on the ready for upload list, and not on the team's todo list: http://wiki.debian.org/Games/Sponsors/Queue http://pet.debian.net/pkg-games/pet.cgi http://udd.debian.org/dmd.cgi?email1=pkg-games-devel%40lists.alioth.debian.orgemail2=email3=packages= 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/20121029055447.gb2...@master.debian.org
Re: Upgrade rar Package Version
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 07:47:26PM -0500, Ma Xiaojun wrote: On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Martin Meredith m...@debian.org wrote: Can't find you in db.debian.org. Not possible to do an NMU if you're not a Debian Uploader Seems like I misunderstood the concept of NMU. What can a outsider do in the first step if he want to contribute Debian? An outsider can do an NMU via a sponsor. In this case there's no need for an NMU because Martin Meredith already wrote that he will update the package soon: I will update this soon when I get a chance to get round to it - but I'm a little strapped for time lately. Possibly next week sometime. 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/20121019014221.gc31...@master.debian.org
mp3diags at mentors
Hi Josue, I had a look at mp3diags at mentors uploaded there on 2012-10-12 06:43. I'm afraid that bug 689811 is not yet fully solved. For example, upstream wrote that the icons are mainly taken from KDE 4' Oxygen icon set, and I don't see the copyright holder(s) mentioned in debian/copyright. Also, the text from upstream you quoted is helpful for clarification, as part of the fix for bug 689811. I suggest to add the exact text in debian/copyright including the From and Date headers. And since you're updating the package anyway : the white lines in debian/rules are still there. You may want to remove them before requesting an unblock to debian-release with a debdiff. 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/20121012193837.ga25...@master.debian.org
Bug#689219: RFS: libcdk5
Hi Jose, I had a look at libcdk5 at mentors uploaded there on 2012-10-08 19:09. The file debian/copyright is not yet complete, see for example include/button.h with Copyright 1999, Grant Edwards. The name Grant Edwards is also mentioned as an author in man/cdk_traverse.3 and man/cdk_button.3. 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/20121009161933.gb21...@master.debian.org
Bug#686513: RFS: jampal/02.01.06+dfsg1-2 -- mp3 song library
Hi Peter, Jampal has been removed from Debian. http://packages.qa.debian.org/j/jampal.html http://packages.qa.debian.org/j/jampal/news/20120917T220525Z.html http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=687727 Do you want to reintroduce it ? http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=685039 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/20121010043119.ga6...@master.debian.org
Bug#683120: RFS: yadifa
Hi Martijn, Please name the package yadifa-1.0.1-1 at mentors to yadifa. 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/20121010045522.ga15...@master.debian.org
Bug#682680: RFS: clean-compiler
Hi Patrick, Please rename the package clean at mentors to clean-compiler. 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/20121010045808.gb15...@master.debian.org
Bug#689941: RFS: fvwm/1:2.6.5.ds-1 [ITA]
On Sun, Oct 07, 2012 at 10:52:43PM -0700, Vincent W. Chen wrote: Some questions: - According to Clause 5. (a) of http://release.debian.org/wheezy/rc_policy.txt, I might be able to request for an unblock from the release team. I don't read anything about unblocks in rc_policy.txt. If you feel that fvwm in testing is so buggy or out of date that we refuse to support it, then you should request the removal of fvwm from testing. For unblocks, the freeze policy matters. Here I read that new upstream versions are seen as significant changes : http://release.debian.org/wheezy/freeze_policy.html But since I'm relatively new to Debian packaging, should I file a request for unblock from release team first or should I find a sponsor first? The freeze policy mentions when to contact the release team. I currently marked the package as experimental and non-RC. No need to request an unblock for a package uploaded to experimental. - From the discussion http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/10/msg00062.html, I was told to keep my changes small. I prepared the package before the discussion, though I'm willing to rip the above listed changes out (debhelper, quilt, etc.) if need be. I merely want to ask for some second opinions before I make the change. The freeze policy suggests to keep the changes limited to those matching the freeze policy, for unstable and testing, not for experimental. Changes since the last upload: You could, if you want that, fix the open important bugs for wheezy via unstable. But you are free to continue with the upload for experimental. 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/20121008064710.ga26...@master.debian.org
Bug#676806: RFS: outguess
Hi Anthony, I had a look at outguess at mentors uploaded there on 2012-10-07 20:37. I suggest to reduce the changes to only the fix for important bug 659737, so that you can ask debian-release for an unblock. 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/20121008181257.ga32...@master.debian.org
scite at mentors
Hi Antonio, I see that scite at mentors (2012-07-30 06:11) contains a newer upstream release and has no closes: #682320. How is progress on fixing bug 682320 in wheezy ? 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/20121006112409.gb23...@master.debian.org
Bug#689415: RFS: flvmeta/1.1.0-1 -- Metadata injector for FLV video files
Hello Neutron Soutmun, I had a look at flvmeta at mentors uploaded there on 2012-10-02 11:57. I see that these files are not identical : ef98d55ff13f7a347be9c37ef5222e84 flvmeta-1.1.0.tar.gz a12a28ff24fb556a1a670ec9aa668081 flvmeta_1.1.0.orig.tar.gz Where did you get flvmeta_1.1.0.orig.tar.gz from ? I got flvmeta-1.1.0.tar.gz from here : http://flvmeta.googlecode.com/files/flvmeta-1.1.0.tar.gz 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/20121006113359.gc23...@master.debian.org
Bug#689219: RFS: libcdk5/5.0.20120323-1 [ITA] -- C-based curses widget library
Hi Jose, I had a look at libcdk5 at mentors uploaded there on 2012-10-02 22:31. I'm not sure about uploading this to unstable, because it has reverse dependencies, and I'm not sure whether this can be disruptive as meant in the freeze policy. Maybe you want it uploaded to experimental instead ? Or do you prefer to delay the upload until after wheezy is released ? 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/20121006115437.gd23...@master.debian.org
openshot at mentors
Hi Jonathan, I had a look at openshot at mentors uploaded there on 2012-10-01 08:20. I see that it has a newer upstream release, so it's not for wheezy. Then I had a look at the open bugs. Bug 685999 seems serious to me, and bugs and 676583 seem something between serious and grave to me. What are your plans for these bugs for wheezy ? 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/20121006120458.ge23...@master.debian.org
mp3diags at mentors
Hi Josue, I had a look at mp3diags at mentors uploaded there on 2012-10-06 06:36. I see that you want to adopt this package without changes (except for the three added newlines in debian/rules). So I had a look at the package to see what could be improved. I saw that debian/copyright is not correct and that the upstream license information is quite confusing. I submitted bug 689811 for that. It would be nice to have that bug fixed in wheezy. 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/20121006151818.gc26...@master.debian.org
burp FTBFS on some arch (Re: exclude)
Hi Rodolfo, On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 12:23:52AM +0200, Rodolfo García Peñas wrote: Do you need the run_test in the package building? The build may succeed without the test but may produce a package failing on the aspects that were tested. Needs further investigation. I suggest that Bas asks help on these lists : http://lists.debian.org/debian-hurd/ http://lists.debian.org/debian-s390/ 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/20121005042433.ga14...@master.debian.org
Re: Out of Date Package and Maintainer Absence
On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 03:58:47PM -0700, Vincent W. Chen wrote: On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:44 PM, Bart Martens ba...@debian.org wrote: I'm intentionally answering to debian-mentors instead of debian-devel. On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 10:27:22PM -0700, Vincent W. Chen wrote: seeing as how the last NMU was on 2012 May 5 and the last update by maintainer Manoj was on 2010 Jun 8. As indicated in the bug report, the current version in Debian is outdated and no longer maintained by upstream. I have contacted Manoj and his reply was included in the bug report, but no update has been received from him since, which was over a month ago. I am willing to co-maintain the package with Manoj, or even maintain it by myself if he's no longer interested in dealing with it. But since there has been no reply Manoj Srivastava wrote on the bug report I would love to have a co-maintainer. I would even give up maintainership, if you prefer that.. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=15;bug=684395 I understand the two options he presented. I merely expected some sort of reply from him to my two messages since. I'll try to contact him privately again. I have now read those two messages. You can start without commit access. You can find a sponsor here. No need to repeat your wish to (co-)maintain the package, as Manoj already offered you two options about that. As far as I can see your additional questions are all answered already. from him I now turn to the list: any suggestion on what I should do now, or what I should have done? You can choose between the two options Manoj Srivastava gave you. Your package at mentors has needs sponsor = no, so you could switch that to yes if you are looking for a sponsor. I understand that I would need a sponsor for my package. Yes. The reason why I did not mark it as needing sponsor was because I'm not adopting nor am I filing ITP --- the package already belongs to a maintainer. One of the two options Manoj gave you, is that you would take over maintainership of the package, and then you could file an ITA. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the process and I should just go on and look for a mentor? Feel free to go ahead and look for a mentor/sponsor. 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/20121005044537.gb14...@master.debian.org
Re: Out of Date Package and Maintainer Absence
Hi Vincent, I'm intentionally answering to debian-mentors instead of debian-devel. On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 10:27:22PM -0700, Vincent W. Chen wrote: My questions involve bug #684395 and the FVWM package. Though the bug is only severity: wishlist, I do hope to see newer version make it to Wheezy, Feel free to ask debian-release to grant an unblock for the newer upstream release as an exception to the freeze policy. seeing as how the last NMU was on 2012 May 5 and the last update by maintainer Manoj was on 2010 Jun 8. As indicated in the bug report, the current version in Debian is outdated and no longer maintained by upstream. I have contacted Manoj and his reply was included in the bug report, but no update has been received from him since, which was over a month ago. I am willing to co-maintain the package with Manoj, or even maintain it by myself if he's no longer interested in dealing with it. But since there has been no reply Manoj Srivastava wrote on the bug report I would love to have a co-maintainer. I would even give up maintainership, if you prefer that.. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=15;bug=684395 from him I now turn to the list: any suggestion on what I should do now, or what I should have done? You can choose between the two options Manoj Srivastava gave you. Your package at mentors has needs sponsor = no, so you could switch that to yes if you are looking for a sponsor. As I stated before, I am not trying to hijack his package. As a user of FVWM I just want to see it updated and some bugs closed. I'm just willing to pick up where he left off and learn the ropes if Manoj don't want to take care of the package anymore. It is good that you want to pick up maintenance of this package. 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/20121004054449.gb23...@master.debian.org
