Re: RFS: arno-iptables-firewall/2.0.3-1 [ITA]
Hello, quote on RFS bugs from [1]: After you uploaded a package, please close the bug report by sending a mail > to nnn-d...@bugs.debian.org. *Do not close RFS bugs in debian/changelog.* [1] https://mentors.debian.net/sponsor/rfs-howto Best wishes, Aleksey
Re: RFS: arno-iptables-firewall/2.0.3-1 [ITA]
Hi Team, one question, is it appropriate to close the RFS-Bug [1] by means of debian/changelog via * New maintainer. (Closes: #886951, #915718) ? [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=915718 Sven
Re: RFS: arno-iptables-firewall/2.0.3-1 [ITA]
Thank you so much, Raphael. Am Mittwoch, den 02.01.2019, 15:44 +0100 schrieb Raphael Hertzog: > Hi, > > On Mon, 31 Dec 2018, Sven Geuer wrote: > > Regarding joining the group I seem to miss the obvious. I didn't > > see > > how to do so on [2]. Please advice. > > I have added you to the team (there's no button to request to join, > you > have to ask here, I just clarified this on the wiki page). > > Cheers,
Re: RFS: arno-iptables-firewall/2.0.3-1 [ITA]
Hello Samuel,
thanks a lot for uploading!
Hello Aleksey,
find my replies inline below.
Am Mittwoch, den 02.01.2019, 17:01 +0300 schrieb Aleksey Kravchenko:
> Hello Sven,
>
> You should now switch the Vcs-* fields to the new repository
> https://salsa.debian.org/pkg-security-team/arno-iptables-firewall
>
> I beleave you should drop ~rc4 suffix after the package version
> (2.0.3-1).
> Now, for reviewing you use git commits, instead of uploading ~rc*
> packages
> to mentors.
Done. Also corrected Maintainer and moved myself to Uploaders.
>
> Samuel,
>
> > you also don't have to check everything, feel free to send
> > checklists of
> the parts you checked and confirmed that are ok.
> I've reviewed a bit.
>
> [x] upstream tarball is imported correctly (checksum match).
> [x] checked d/watch with uscan - works as expected, although it's
> unusual
> to see uupdate running from d/watch.
I followed
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/dother.en.html#watch
doing it this way.
> [x] fr.po and sv.po are correctly converted to uft8
> [x] d/control looks sane
> [x] new d/arno-iptables-firewall.logrotate looks good
>
> autopkgtest and d/templates look dependent on existence of ppp
> interface,
> so it should be verified.
ppp+ is the standard placeholder for a ppp interface that may become
available later. It's one of the features of arno-iptables-firewall
that it can deal with this.
Therefore autopkgtest does not need a real ppp either. It checks
whether the generated configuration file and the installed iptables
rules are as expected. No real network traffic is produced or consumed.
>
> The diff is big (>2200 lines) mostly because of two converted .po
> files
Contentwise nothing has changed there, it's only the conversion from
latin1 to utf8.
> and modified debian/{post,pre}* scripts.
> I think these scripts should be reviewed after all other changes.
These are constructed starting from fresh dh_make templates. Then I
imported logic from the previous scripts where appropriate or
rewrote/extended it. For easier review, may be it helps to diff with
option --ignore-space-change.
Best,
Sven
Re: RFS: arno-iptables-firewall/2.0.3-1 [ITA]
Hi, On Mon, 31 Dec 2018, Sven Geuer wrote: > Regarding joining the group I seem to miss the obvious. I didn't see > how to do so on [2]. Please advice. I have added you to the team (there's no button to request to join, you have to ask here, I just clarified this on the wiki page). Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer Support Debian LTS: https://www.freexian.com/services/debian-lts.html Learn to master Debian: https://debian-handbook.info/get/
Re: RFS: arno-iptables-firewall/2.0.3-1 [ITA]
Hello Sven,
You should now switch the Vcs-* fields to the new repository
https://salsa.debian.org/pkg-security-team/arno-iptables-firewall
I beleave you should drop ~rc4 suffix after the package version (2.0.3-1).
Now, for reviewing you use git commits, instead of uploading ~rc* packages
to mentors.
Samuel,
> you also don't have to check everything, feel free to send checklists of
the parts you checked and confirmed that are ok.
I've reviewed a bit.
[x] upstream tarball is imported correctly (checksum match).
[x] checked d/watch with uscan - works as expected, although it's unusual
to see uupdate running from d/watch.
[x] fr.po and sv.po are correctly converted to uft8
[x] d/control looks sane
[x] new d/arno-iptables-firewall.logrotate looks good
autopkgtest and d/templates look dependent on existence of ppp interface,
so it should be verified.
The diff is big (>2200 lines) mostly because of two converted .po files
and modified debian/{post,pre}* scripts.
I think these scripts should be reviewed after all other changes.
Best regards,
Aleksey
On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 4:02 AM Samuel Henrique wrote:
> Hello Sven,
>
> I started looking at the package, but as there are a lot of changes in
> there, it will take some time until I can review and confirm that all of
> them are ok and we are close to the freeze. That's why I decided to upload
> the package to experimental for now, so it's also easier for other people
> to test the package.
>
> If anybody else from the team is also available, it would be great if we
> had more people reviewing it*, so we can make sure it will be available on
> Buster. I will try my best to review all of it and sponsor the package
> before 6th January nonetheless.
>
> Thanks for your work Sven.
>
> * Note that you don't have to be a DD or DM to review the package,
> everyone is welcomed and that's a good way of learning packaging, you also
> don't have to check everything, feel free to send checklists of the parts
> you checked and confirmed that are ok.
>
> --
> Samuel Henrique
>
Re: Request for review/upload of libpff 20180714
Hello, On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 4:09 AM Samuel Henrique wrote: > I just noticed another thing, you can update d/watch now to follow github > tags, the upstream started tagging releases recently. Could you please > commit that? I'm not sure if it's worth another upload, but at least it > will be already fixed on git. > Done > Uploaded, Thanks for your work! I suppose reviewing so many changes was not simple :) > Could you please forward the applicable patches upstream? I'll do. Just waited for these patches to pass review. ;) Best wishes, Aleksey
