advice on maintainting packages on alioth ?
Hello mentors, In future, I would like to maintain my packages in Mercurial (or git) repositories. It seams the best place for these to be would be alioth, but I'm not sure where is the best place -- should I rather request a private sub-directory or apply for collab-maint membership and upload packages there ? I have some doubts about collab-maint though: Maintenance is unlikely to be collaborative, and I'm not in NM, which pretty much takes care of the point of collab-maint as outlined on the wiki [1]. Also, I'm not sure how readily private hg/git sub-directories are granted to non-DDs. [1] http://wiki.debian.org/CollaborativeMaintenance -- Regards, Thomas Jollans GPG key: 0xF421434B may be found on various keyservers, eg pgp.mit.edu Hacker key <http://hackerkey.com/>: v4sw6+8Yhw4/5ln3pr5Ock2ma2u7Lw2Nl7Di2e2t3/4TMb6HOPTen5/6g5OPa1XsMr9p-7/-6 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
(still) RFS: syck -- a fast YAML parser kit (updated/improved package)
Hello mentors, (David: after your blog post I decided to Cc ;-) ) I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.55+svn256-1 of the package 'syck', which is already in Debian. Robert Jordens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is the registered maintainer and has given me permission to take the package, but has stopped respoding to my mail. The meta data: * Package name: syck Version : 0.55+svn256-1 Upstream Author : Why The Lucky Stiff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://whytheluckystiff.net/syck * License : BSD Section : devel Where to get the package: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/syck/syck_0.55+svn256-1.dsc Why you really want to sponsor this: YAML <http://yaml.org> is a great language, and syck is quite a good and especially fast parser for it (the package includes PHP5 (was PHP4!) bindings and the C lib). At the moment, syck is in a very lousy state in Debian - an antique (and thus less useful) version full of bugs. After this upload, the state of it would be much less lousy --- The fixed bugs can be used as a simple inaccurate statistical proof here: it fixes bugs 324316, 359245, 378440, 415217, 418308, 432416 This upload would also enable the upload of my package python-syck, which would fix a user request and another bunch of bugs. I hope this package not to be too much hassle; It's lintian and linda clean at any rate. I would like to add that the package has been finished for over a month. (I first requested sponsorship on this list in 26 Jun...) Thank you for reading this far, Looking forward to hearing from you Thomas Jollans signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: dpkg-buildpackage and fakeroot
On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 14:19 -0400, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote: > Hi all > > Can someone please tell me the difference between > > dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot dpkg-buildpackage uses fakeroot when being a normal user doesn't suffice. > fakeroot dpkg-buildpackage dpkg-buildpackage is run 100% in fakeroot. > fakeroot dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot That's overkill. > Which one should I use for building packages in Debian? If you must use dpkg-buildpackage, I'd say the first. But you should really use a chroot, maybe not for every rebuild, but for every package. pdebuild (from pbuilder) is a useful tool here - it can also use cowdancer's cowbuilder to avoid all the nasty base.tgz unpacking. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: syck
On Mon, 2007-07-02 at 00:05 +0200, Thomas Jollans wrote: > The upload would fix these bugs: 324316, 359245, 378440, 415217, 418308 The new FTBTS bug #432416 would also be fixed by this upload. (I've re-uploaded the package with the changelog accordingly adapted) I am still looking for a sponsor, and would be glad if someone at least reviewed the package Thanks, Thomas Jollans signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Licensing problems for mpeg2vidcodec
On Tuesday 03 July 2007, François Févotte wrote: > Dear Mentors, > > I would like to package mpeg2vidcodec, which the reference > implementation of the MPEG2 codec provided by the MPEG Software > Simulation Group[1]. It provides two binaries (mpeg2encode and > mpeg2decode), which are needed by ImageMagick to handle MPEG files. > > However, the authors of this software seem to have disappeared without > leaving any forwarding address. Moreover, I have not been able to find > any information about the license it is placed under. The only thing I > can tell is that the tarball is distributed in many places over the > web (for example on the ImageMagick mirrors in the delegates > directory[2]) ; this is no proof, but it could indicate that Debian > could redistribute it too... > > What would you advise me to do? I would really like to package this > codec since it could improve ImageMagick's usability a lot, but maybe > these licensing/distribution issues cannot be dealt with :/ > > FYI, there has already been an RFP[3] for mpeg2vidcodec, but it seems > to have been abandonned. This is found in the source (src/mpeg2dec/mpeg2dec.c and probably other files): * These software programs are available to the user without any license fee or * royalty on an "as is" basis. The MPEG Software Simulation Group disclaims * any and all warranties, whether express, implied, or statuary, including any * implied warranties or merchantability or of fitness for a particular * purpose. In no event shall the copyright-holder be liable for any * incidental, punitive, or consequential damages of any kind whatsoever * arising from the use of these programs. * * This disclaimer of warranty extends to the user of these programs and user's * customers, employees, agents, transferees, successors, and assigns. * * The MPEG Software Simulation Group does not represent or warrant that the * programs furnished hereunder are free of infringement of any third-party * patents. * * Commercial implementations of MPEG-1 and MPEG-2 video, including shareware, * are subject to royalty fees to patent holders. Many of these patents are * general enough such that they are unavoidable regardless of implementation * design. IANAL... I don't think there is anything that gives us, the free university of Berlin, or anyone, the right to redistribute the code. It is obvious that everyone ignores this, but since when has the internet been good on copyright law ? Debian shouldn't engage in "software piracy", and I doubt you'd get this software, if you packaged it, through NEW if you tried. -- Regards, Thomas Jollans GPG key: 0xF421434B may be found on various keyservers, eg pgp.mit.edu Hacker key <http://hackerkey.com/>: v4sw6+8Yhw4/5ln3pr5Ock2ma2u7Lw2Nl7Di2e2t3/4TMb6HOPTen5/6g5OPa1XsMr9p-7/-6 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
RFS: syck
Dear mentors, I am looking for the new version 0.55+svn256-1 of the package syck which is already in Debian, maintained by Robert Jordens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. jordens doesn't use it any more and has given me permission to "take it". (He isn't responding to my mail - might be on vacation) * Package name: syck Version : 0.55+svn256-1 Upstream Author : Why The Lucky Stiff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://whytheluckystiff.net/syck * License : BSD Section : devel * Syck is a simple YAML parser kit. . YAML(tm) (rhymes with 'camel') is a straightforward machine parsable data serialization format designed for human readability and interaction with scripting languages such as Perl and Python. YAML is optimized for data serialization, formatted dumping, configuration files, log files, Internet messaging and filtering. This specification describes the YAML information model and serialization format. Together with the Unicode standard for characters, it provides all the information necessary to understand YAML Version 1.0 and construct computer programs to process it. . The whole point of Syck is to make parsing and emitting YAML very simple for scripting languages through C bindings. It doesn't strive to be a pull parser or very extendible. It just is concerned with loading a YAML document into a C structure which can be easily translated into a scripting language's internal native data type. It builds these binary packages: libsyck0-dev - YAML parser kit -- development files php5-syck - YAML parser kit -- PHP5 bindings The package is lintian and linda clean The upload would fix these bugs: 324316, 359245, 378440, 415217, 418308 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/syck - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/syck/syck_0.55+svn256-1.dsc I would be very glad if someone uploaded this package for me. -- Regards, Thomas Jollans GPG key: 0xF421434B may be found on various keyservers, eg pgp.mit.edu Hacker key <http://hackerkey.com/>: v4sw6+8Yhw4/5ln3pr5Ock2ma2u7Lw2Nl7Di2e2t3/4TMb6HOPTen5/6g5OPa1XsMr9p-7/-6 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: RFS: python-syck (updated package)
David Paleino wrote: > Il giorno Tue, 26 Jun 2007 16:20:09 +0200 > Thomas Jollans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto: > >> Dear mentors, > > Hi Thomas, > >> I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.61.2-1 >> of the package "python-syck". It was previously built from the "syck" >> source package which I am taking over from Robert Jordens (see my >> other mail) >> >> Robert had suggested to name the package 'python-pysyck' to avoid a >> transition in syck. I decided not to do this after seeking advice on >> the debian-python list since it conflicts with the debian python >> policy. > > I'm not a DD, so take this comment "cum grano salis". > > Why are you building python-syck as a separate package? Why not > editing debian/control in the syck package you RFSed a second ago? I > think it would be much more cleaner having syck providing python-syck, > php5-syck and libsyck, instead of having multiple source packages. the old python-syck package contained the "syck" python package as contained in the libsyck source. This python-syck package contains the "syck" python package of the seperate PySyck project. PySyck is compatible, but technically better, and apparently more popular. -- Regards, Thomas Jollans GPG key: 0xF421434B may be found on various keyservers, eg pgp.mit.edu Hacker key <http://hackerkey.com/>: v4sw6+8Yhw4/5ln3pr5Ock2ma2u7Lw2Nl7Di2e2t3/4TMb6HOPTen5/6g5OPa1XsMr9p-7/-6 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
RFS: python-syck (updated package)
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.61.2-1 of the package "python-syck". It was previously built from the "syck" source package which I am taking over from Robert Jordens (see my other mail) Robert had suggested to name the package 'python-pysyck' to avoid a transition in syck. I decided not to do this after seeking advice on the debian-python list since it conflicts with the debian python policy. It builds these binary packages: python-syck - PySyck python bindings to the Syck YAML parser kit The package is lintian and linda clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 261928, 286173, 293251, 293252, 299536, 347417, 373388, 415756 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/python-syck - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/python-syck/python-syck_0.61.2-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. -- Regards, Thomas Jollans GPG key: 0xF421434B may be found on various keyservers, eg pgp.mit.edu Hacker key <http://hackerkey.com/>: v4sw6+8Yhw4/5ln3pr5Ock2ma2u7Lw2Nl7Di2e2t3/4TMb6HOPTen5/6g5OPa1XsMr9p-7/-6 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
RFS: syck (updated package)
Dear mentors, dear Robert, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.55+svn256-1 of the "syck", which I am taking over from Robert Jordens with his permission since he doesn't use it any more. It builds these binary packages: libsyck0-dev - YAML parser kit -- development files php5-syck - YAML parser kit -- PHP5 bindings The binary package python-syck was removed as it is to be replaced with PySyck (see bugs 347417 and 415756) The package is lintian and linda clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 324316, 359245, 378440, 415217, 418308 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/syck - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/syck/syck_0.55+svn256-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. -- Regards, Thomas Jollans GPG key: 0xF421434B may be found on various keyservers, eg pgp.mit.edu Hacker key <http://hackerkey.com/>: v4sw6+8Yhw4/5ln3pr5Ock2ma2u7Lw2Nl7Di2e2t3/4TMb6HOPTen5/6g5OPa1XsMr9p-7/-6 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Bug#413985: RFS: elfio
On Tuesday 20 March 2007 23:17, Paul TBBle Hampson wrote: > On Tue, Mar 20, 2007 at 01:40:32PM +0100, Thomas Jollans wrote: > > On Tuesday 20 March 2007 04:41, Paul TBBle Hampson wrote: > >> It builds these binary packages: > >> libelfio-dev - library for reading and generating ELF files > > > > This package should be split in a binary package with the library, and an > > architecture-independant -dev package with headers and example AFAIK. > > What would be the benefit of seperating the headers from the static > library? I don't see how either is useful on its own. My mistake, I missed that it's a static library. However, the binary in /usr/bin - is it useful on its own or just used to configure something about the library. Kind Regards, Thomas Jollans pgpH6Go464udZ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: elfio
On Tuesday 20 March 2007 04:41, Paul TBBle Hampson wrote: > It builds these binary packages: > libelfio-dev - library for reading and generating ELF files This package should be split in a binary package with the library, and an architecture-independant -dev package with headers and example AFAIK. Regards, Thomas Jollans pgpajWQhnEiEk.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: chatplus
On Sunday 18 March 2007 01:55, Mohammed Sameer wrote: > [snip] > > On Sat, Mar 17, 2007 at 05:15:18PM +0100, Thomas Jollans wrote: > > mentors.debian.org says that the package is lintian clean, my local > > lintian disagrees in points which are, IMHO, ignoreable (non-executable > > scripts in /usr/lib/chatplus which have wrappers in /usr/bin, one icon > > in /usr/lib/chatplus) > > W: chatplus: image-file-in-usr-lib usr/lib/chatplus/pixmaps/icon.png > N: > N: This package installs a pixmap or a bitmap within /usr/lib. According > N: to the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard, architecture-independent files > N: need to be placed within /usr/share instead. > > AFAICT. an icon in /usr/lib is against the File System Hierarchy. > > I'm not sure how the non-executable scripts should be handled but I guess > they should get the executable bit set. Due to this being more serious than I thought, I have uploaded a lintian and linda clean package with the same version number that splits /usr/lib and /usr/share. Due to a Reply-To header on this mailing list, I originally replied to Mohammed. Regards, Thomas Jollans pgp2SC5IC5oeb.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: chatplus
Hello again, I just cleaned debian/rules up a bit (removing useless comments and such). On Saturday 17 March 2007 17:15, Thomas Jollans wrote: > mentors.debian.org says that the package is lintian clean, my local lintian > disagrees in points which are, IMHO, ignoreable (non-executable scripts > in /usr/lib/chatplus which have wrappers in /usr/bin, one icon > in /usr/lib/chatplus) to be precise, the source package is both lintian and linda clean, the binaries are not. (Linda has no problem with non-executable scripts though) Regards, Thomas Jollans pgpCWrIsDRSGv.pgp Description: PGP signature
RFS: chatplus
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "chatplus". * Package name: chatplus Version : 0.1-1 Upstream Author : Thomas Jollans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (me) * URL : http://zombiehq.xyzplanet.net/zhq/projects/chat * License : GPL Section : net It builds these binary packages: chatplus - a simple graphical LAN chat programme with unicode chatplus-server - a simple LAN chat programme with unicode (server) mentors.debian.org says that the package is lintian clean, my local lintian disagrees in points which are, IMHO, ignoreable (non-executable scripts in /usr/lib/chatplus which have wrappers in /usr/bin, one icon in /usr/lib/chatplus) The upload would fix these bugs: 415257 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/chatplus - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/chatplus/chatplus_0.1-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Thomas Jollans pgpxXZyr6SNSu.pgp Description: PGP signature
