Re: Minutes from Getting your packages into Debian
Hi! David Bremner brem...@debian.org writes: QUOTE: Bremner: Gobby is not emacs, it's so sad. you know rudel-mode? ;-) Regards Christoph -- 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/87a9xxbvep@mitoraj.siccegge.de
Re: Minutes from Getting your packages into Debian
On 14/08/12 11:49, Christoph Egger wrote: Hi! David Bremner brem...@debian.org writes: QUOTE: Bremner: Gobby is not emacs, it's so sad. you know rudel-mode? ;-) Somebody please make it work with etherpads! -- Regards, Dmitrijs. -- 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/502a2e49.4000...@debian.org
Re: Minutes from Getting your packages into Debian
Hi, On 02.08.2012 05:07, PICCORO McKAY Lenz wrote: this stupid DM process only make debian packagin more slower to evolution, i have a problem uploading a debian mentors sig file and nobody respond and solves my problem I cannot see how the DM process is related to sponsoring in the first place. Actually, being a DM makes sponsoring unnecessary in many cases. Having that said: Criticizing is easy, but do you have actual suggestions how to improve? -- with kind regards, Arno Töll IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Minutes from Getting your packages into Debian
this stupid DM process only make debian packagin more slower to evolution,
i have a problem uploading a debian mentors sig file and nobody respond and
solves my problem
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 11:22 AM, David Bremner brem...@debian.org wrote:
Hi all;
Here are the minutes from the (apparently) annual mentors-bof, thanks
to Didier Raboud for taking them. It turned into a bit more of a
tutorial session than last year, which I don't think is necessarily a
bad thing. I also attach the LaTeX source for the slides; a pdf is
available (somewhere) on penta.debconf.org.
===
QUOTE: Bremner: Gobby is not emacs, it's so sad.
Some statistics:
* 18790 packages are in Sid, amongst which 3036 are non-NMU sponsored
packages. If you use Debian, you are probably needing one of those;
you probably rely on any of them. 946 active DDs, 178 DMs, 906
sponsored people.
OPINION: Bremner: There's a high barrier to be able to upload packages
without a key in the /magic keyring/.
OPINION: Bremner: Know packaging, love packaging, do packaging. This
amount of work is the tiny part of getting packages sponsored.
Bremner: sponsoring as a source for new contributors, not only about new
packages; most of actual DDs have come to Debian trough getting packages
sponsored, this shouldn't be underestimated as a source of future DDs.
Bremner: There are DDs that sponsor, others that don't, various reasons
undermine this.
== The big picture ==
There is sort-of a command-line shock: debian-mentors{.*} is not
anywhere close to Launchpad™.
The Mighty Steps to Getting My Package Uploaded:
* Prepare (Close your browser, open a terminal, Gh !? )
* ITP (for new packages, reportbug wnpp)
* go package (get help from #debian-mentors, feedback on your
ITP[probably not positive].
* upload (well, sort-of) to mentors.debian.net : Upload, QA
check, …
* File a Request For Sponsoring (RFS) against
sponsorship-requests. \o/ BTS fun
* Wait, Revise, Wait, Revise, More Wait. This time the feedback is
most probably positive.
* Your Package Gets Uploaded™ (or not…)
== What packages belong in Debian ? ==
It recently came as a surprise to some that someone wants a new package
to Debian but it might very well be that `Debian doesn't want it`…
ITP serves three roles:
* Sanity check incoming packages
* First contact of new contributions with the Debian community
* Mutex to avoid multiple people working on the same
thing. (less important in sponsoring context)
The perception of ITP depends on the side: the filer says here's the
work I did, I propose it to Debian, while debian-devel (if that
exists) understands it as here's a new package `Debian` will have to
maintain.
Closing RFS's is another (fairly rarely used) feedback mechanism: make
sure feedback is given out soon enough.
== Tracking sponsorship requests in the BTS ==
After this experiment started, there has been been a lot more noise on
the mailing list, but is planned to be improved.
* 28 RC bugs fixed, 172 updates, 69? new packages; quite a successful
experiment.
== Discussion ==
Q: Bottleneck in those steps ^ ? A: Not enough sponsors.
I: Teams are not an administrative barrier, they are probably a resource.
Q: Maybe we are not communicating / enforcing the needed commitment for
new packages: in fact, the lifetime of a package is in measured in
multiple years (unstable-testing-stable-security- …).
I: Removal of packages doesn't only carry a /technical/ cost, it does
carry a human cost too (users, …).
Q: Do the packages need to be in english? A: Not necessarily, but
description and copyright probably need both for sponsors and
FTP-Masters team.
--
Lenz McKAY Gerardo (PICCORO)
http://qglochekone.blogspot.com
Minutes from Getting your packages into Debian
Hi all;
Here are the minutes from the (apparently) annual mentors-bof, thanks
to Didier Raboud for taking them. It turned into a bit more of a
tutorial session than last year, which I don't think is necessarily a
bad thing. I also attach the LaTeX source for the slides; a pdf is
available (somewhere) on penta.debconf.org.
===
QUOTE: Bremner: Gobby is not emacs, it's so sad.
Some statistics:
* 18790 packages are in Sid, amongst which 3036 are non-NMU sponsored
packages. If you use Debian, you are probably needing one of those;
you probably rely on any of them. 946 active DDs, 178 DMs, 906
sponsored people.
OPINION: Bremner: There's a high barrier to be able to upload packages
without a key in the /magic keyring/.
OPINION: Bremner: Know packaging, love packaging, do packaging. This
amount of work is the tiny part of getting packages sponsored.
Bremner: sponsoring as a source for new contributors, not only about new
packages; most of actual DDs have come to Debian trough getting packages
sponsored, this shouldn't be underestimated as a source of future DDs.
Bremner: There are DDs that sponsor, others that don't, various reasons
undermine this.
== The big picture ==
There is sort-of a command-line shock: debian-mentors{.*} is not
anywhere close to Launchpad™.
The Mighty Steps to Getting My Package Uploaded:
* Prepare (Close your browser, open a terminal, Gh !? )
* ITP (for new packages, reportbug wnpp)
* go package (get help from #debian-mentors, feedback on your
ITP[probably not positive].
* upload (well, sort-of) to mentors.debian.net : Upload, QA check, …
* File a Request For Sponsoring (RFS) against sponsorship-requests.
\o/ BTS fun
* Wait, Revise, Wait, Revise, More Wait. This time the feedback is most
probably positive.
* Your Package Gets Uploaded™ (or not…)
== What packages belong in Debian ? ==
It recently came as a surprise to some that someone wants a new package
to Debian but it might very well be that `Debian doesn't want it`…
ITP serves three roles:
* Sanity check incoming packages
* First contact of new contributions with the Debian community
* Mutex to avoid multiple people working on the same
thing. (less important in sponsoring context)
The perception of ITP depends on the side: the filer says here's the
work I did, I propose it to Debian, while debian-devel (if that
exists) understands it as here's a new package `Debian` will have to
maintain.
Closing RFS's is another (fairly rarely used) feedback mechanism: make
sure feedback is given out soon enough.
== Tracking sponsorship requests in the BTS ==
After this experiment started, there has been been a lot more noise on
the mailing list, but is planned to be improved.
* 28 RC bugs fixed, 172 updates, 69? new packages; quite a successful
experiment.
== Discussion ==
Q: Bottleneck in those steps ^ ? A: Not enough sponsors.
I: Teams are not an administrative barrier, they are probably a resource.
Q: Maybe we are not communicating / enforcing the needed commitment for
new packages: in fact, the lifetime of a package is in measured in
multiple years (unstable-testing-stable-security- …).
I: Removal of packages doesn't only carry a /technical/ cost, it does
carry a human cost too (users, …).
Q: Do the packages need to be in english? A: Not necessarily, but
description and copyright probably need both for sponsors and
FTP-Masters team.
\documentclass[presentation]{beamer}
\usetheme{default}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
%\usepackage{fixltx2e}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage{float}
\usepackage{wrapfig}
\usepackage{soul}
\usepackage{textcomp}
\usepackage{marvosym}
\usepackage{wasysym}
\usepackage{latexsym}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{hyperref}
\AtBeginSection[]
{
\begin{frame}beamer
\tableofcontents[currentsection]
\end{frame}
}
\tolerance=1000
\providecommand{\alert}[1]{\textbf{#1}}
\newcommand{\notes}[1]{\par\vfill\small\textbf{Notes:} #1}
\newcommand{\recipebutton}[1]{\hyperlink{#1}{\beamergotobutton{#1}}\hypertarget{back:#1}{}}
\newcommand{\recipe}[1]{\hypertarget{#1}{}\hyperlink{back:#1}{\beamerreturnbutton{back}}}
\title{Getting your packages into Debian}
\author{David Bremner}
\titlegraphic{based on notes by Asheesh Laroia, Arno Töll,
and Nicolas Dandrimont, shameless cribbing from mailing lists, and stuff I just made up}
\date{9 July 2012}
\usecolortheme{rose}
\begin{document}
\begin{frame}
\maketitle
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}
\frametitle{This is not a lecture}
\begin{block}+-{What's it about?}
Getting packages \emph{sponsored}, i.e uploaded Debian for people
without keys in the uploading keyring.
\end{block}
\begin{block}+-{What's the plan?} I have some slides to fill the
awkward silences. It would be great if I \emph{fail} to make it to
the end of my slides, because we find more interesting things to
