Re: RM request for coquelicot and its reverse deps?
Hi Daniel, all, On 20-02-11 23:42:11, Georg Faerber wrote: > On 20-02-12 00:29:55, Daniel Leidert wrote: > > can we file RM requests for coquelicot and its reverse dependencies > > like ruby- haml-magic-translations? Both are dead upstream and have RC > > bugs. ruby-haml- magic-translations further (build-)depends on a > > non-available ruby-haml version and is not trivial to fix to work with > > ruby-haml 5 (I just tried; or maybe it's just the tests which need > > fixing?). So IMHO if we keep these packages we actually become the new > > upstream for these packages. coquelicot has just two installations > > according to popcon. > > > > Can we agree on filing RM requests? > > Not yet please -- I would like to check with some people before doing > so. Please go ahead in regards to the removal, and let me know if you need support, e.g. with filling bug reports, etc. Cheers, Georg
Re: confirming some package names before creating them (was Re: [Pkg-puppet-devel] in need of a little help for packaing puppet development kit with all dependencies)
Hi, On 20-02-15 19:15:34, Gabriel Filion wrote: > For the following, here's what I'm intending to choose as a package > name (ITPs still need to ben sent). I think these are more probably OK > to be named without the "ruby-" prefix: > > * jgrep >-> this one seems rather clear to me since the main script can be > used independantly on the CLI to process any JSON information > * facterdb >-> this one is usually mainly used as a library but it does ship a > main script that can be used for printing a set of information from the > library > * metadata-json-lint >-> same situation as facterdb: it's mainly used as a library but it > does ship a script for running checks on a file independently on the CLI Let's go with these, then. > This one is a bit more tricky: > > * ruby-pathspec >-> it's mainly used as a lib but it does ship a script for testing > values on the CLI. >* I've already sent an ITP for "ruby-pathspec" before I realized it > was shipping a script. So if I need to change the name, I'll just need > to know how I can deal with the ITP bug report to avoid issues.. send a > bts command to re-title, or is there another manipulation necessary? That's the way to go, probably adding a small comment to the body of the mail to explain the name change. >* The script that's shipped is named "pathspec-rb" which differs from > the gem name "pathspec". Should the package take on the name of that > script, "pathspec-rb", even though the library itself is called > "pathspec"? it seems a bit confusing >* "pathspec" is pretty generic and refers to a concept in the git > codebase, so I would possibly tend to keep "ruby-pathspec" as the > package name. what do others think about this? Sounds good to me. Regarding the name of the script, in case this one gets installed into /usr/bin, I guess it makes sense to use the same name as well, as 'pathspec' is quite generic. Cheers, Georg
Re: question about licensing for ruby-spdx-licenses
Hi, On 20-02-15 19:30:33, Gabriel Filion wrote: > There's one package that I need to create as a dependency of > puppet-development-kit for which I had some questions pop to mind > about licensing: ruby-spdx-licenses > > The code ships a json file that contains information about all of the > licenses that the library helps with identifying. This json file was > copied from the SPDX web site: > > https://github.com/domcleal/spdx-licenses#spdx-licenses > > From what I could gather, the website specifies that all content is > covered by CC-BY 3.0: > > https://spdx.org/Trademark > https://www.linuxfoundation.org/terms/ > > Then, I also found some mentions about some terms related to the use > of the SPDX name, which would be present in the package name and in > the description, and this is where I feel like I'm in uncertain waters > (at least for me): > > https://spdx.org/frequently-asked-questions-faq-0 > > "Can I use the SPDX trademark? > Yes. It is a registered trademark so don't forget the (r)." > > Do I need to add (r) after the name "SPDX" in the description? Is it > an issue if the name is used in the package name (since it's in the > name of the gem) ? As far as I understand, this is about a single json file, which copyright foo is unclear. I'm by no means an expert in this field, probably debian-legal@ is able to help. I guess, personally, I would just get rid of this file via a Files-Excluded: stanza in debian/copyright and leveraging the repack feature of debian/watch to repack (to remove said file) the upstream tarball. Cheers, Georg
Re: RM request for coquelicot and its reverse deps?
Hi Lunar, all, On 20-02-12 10:15:23, Jérémy Bobbio wrote: > I am sorry I dropped the ball like I did. I don't think I'll return to > developing Coquelicot anytime soon, even if there are still probably > interesting work to be done. I wouldn't mind RM requests, quite the > opposite. By all means: no need to say sorry. I was an avid user of Coquelicot and Schleuder for years, back then, and still today (only the later): I'm deeply grateful for the work you've done. > I've yet to find enough time and resolution to properly orphan my > former packages and ask for emeritus status. Any help in this > direction feels great. Filling bugs against packages to having you removed from Uploaders: would help, I guess? A bit sad to see you go, cheers Georg
