Re: Source package naming
On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 18:12 +, David Nusinow wrote: We're not currently on alioth. We'll be moving to git there early in the post-etch cycle, but if you want access to our current svn, you need to write Branden Robinson with your public ssh key. I'll add you to our alioth project though so you'll have access to the git repo when the time comes. Thanks, I've written to Branden. I'm away over the weekend but I'll attempt to get something committed next week. Ian. -- Ian Campbell Whom the mad would destroy, first they make Gods. -- Bernard Levin signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Source package naming
(Please continue to CC me) On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 00:12 +0300, Daniel Stone wrote: On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 08:45:21PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: Is there a particular reason for this? I've tried searching the debian-x archives but I can't see it. Purely historical reasons: the binary package is named xserver-xorg-video-foo to have a clear lineage from xserver-xorg. OK, thanks for the info. David Nusinow wrote, in a message he forgot to CC me on ;-) I have xf86-video-ivtvdev_0.10.6.orig.tar.gz and I'm wondering if I should repack/rename it before upload (well, before searching for a sponsor ;-)). Don't bother repacking it. Just rename it. I can sponsor the driver if you're interested. If you want to bring the package under the maintainership of the XSF with you as the primary uploader[1], you're more than welcome to do so. Just let us know. I'm currently maintaining the kernel side of things under pkg-mythtv on Alioth but I think for this package it makes more sense to integrate it with the XSF than pkg-mythtv so I'll take you up on that kind offer. My username on alioth is ijc-guest, do you need anything else from me? ssh key perhaps? Thanks, Ian. -- Ian Campbell Most public domain software is free, at least at first glance. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Source package naming
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 08:00:57PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: (Please continue to CC me) On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 00:12 +0300, Daniel Stone wrote: On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 08:45:21PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: Is there a particular reason for this? I've tried searching the debian-x archives but I can't see it. Purely historical reasons: the binary package is named xserver-xorg-video-foo to have a clear lineage from xserver-xorg. OK, thanks for the info. David Nusinow wrote, in a message he forgot to CC me on ;-) I have xf86-video-ivtvdev_0.10.6.orig.tar.gz and I'm wondering if I should repack/rename it before upload (well, before searching for a sponsor ;-)). Don't bother repacking it. Just rename it. I can sponsor the driver if you're interested. If you want to bring the package under the maintainership of the XSF with you as the primary uploader[1], you're more than welcome to do so. Just let us know. I'm currently maintaining the kernel side of things under pkg-mythtv on Alioth but I think for this package it makes more sense to integrate it with the XSF than pkg-mythtv so I'll take you up on that kind offer. My username on alioth is ijc-guest, do you need anything else from me? ssh key perhaps? We're not currently on alioth. We'll be moving to git there early in the post-etch cycle, but if you want access to our current svn, you need to write Branden Robinson with your public ssh key. I'll add you to our alioth project though so you'll have access to the git repo when the time comes. - David Nusinow -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Source package naming
Hi, Please CC me -- I am not subscribed. I am in the process of packaging the X driver for the IVTV cards[0] and I'm wondering about the correct source package name. It seems that the upstream source is named xf86-video-FOO[1] and that is repacked for Debian as xserver-xorg-video-FOO[2]. Is there a particular reason for this? I've tried searching the debian-x archives but I can't see it. I have xf86-video-ivtvdev_0.10.6.orig.tar.gz and I'm wondering if I should repack/rename it before upload (well, before searching for a sponsor ;-)). In any case the binary package will be xserver-xorg-video-ivtv as you would expect. Thanks for your advice, Ian. [0] http://www.ivtvdriver.org. the kernel side is already in Debian in the ivtv package http://packages.qa.debian.org/i/ivtv.html [1] http://xorg.freedesktop.org/releases/X11R7.1/src/everything/ [2] http://packages.qa.debian.org/x/xserver-xorg-video-i810.html -- Ian Campbell He asked me if I knew what time it was -- I said yes, but not right now. -- Steven Wright signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Source package naming
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 08:45:21PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: Is there a particular reason for this? I've tried searching the debian-x archives but I can't see it. Purely historical reasons: the binary package is named xserver-xorg-video-foo to have a clear lineage from xserver-xorg. I have xf86-video-ivtvdev_0.10.6.orig.tar.gz and I'm wondering if I should repack/rename it before upload (well, before searching for a sponsor ;-)). I guess the only real reason now is consistency with the rest. elmo once said on IRC that the binary namespace is reasonably tightly regulated and was very sensible, but the source package namespace was a festering mess with a sign out the front saying 'here be dragons'. :) Cheers, Daniel signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Source package naming
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 08:45:21PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: Hi, Please CC me -- I am not subscribed. I am in the process of packaging the X driver for the IVTV cards[0] and I'm wondering about the correct source package name. It seems that the upstream source is named xf86-video-FOO[1] and that is repacked for Debian as xserver-xorg-video-FOO[2]. Is there a particular reason for this? I've tried searching the debian-x archives but I can't see it. As Daniel says, to provide a clear lineage. The 'xf86' at this point refers to the DDX, not the server itself. This naming scheme is far more clear to the average user who doesn't know or care what a DDX is. I have xf86-video-ivtvdev_0.10.6.orig.tar.gz and I'm wondering if I should repack/rename it before upload (well, before searching for a sponsor ;-)). Don't bother repacking it. Just rename it. I can sponsor the driver if you're interested. If you want to bring the package under the maintainership of the XSF with you as the primary uploader[1], you're more than welcome to do so. Just let us know. In any case the binary package will be xserver-xorg-video-ivtv as you would expect. Please do. - David Nusinow [1] See http://wiki.debian.org/XStrikeForce/Contrib for how we're structuring maintainance within the team. You'd be de-facto maintainer, though the XSF would be maintainer in name and we'd all help you out as need be. If you're not in NM yet, joining the team is a very good opportunity for learning how Debia works. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
