On 15/11/17 at 16:43 +0100, Steffen Möller wrote:
> Hello,
>
> my QA page or our blend's task page (like
> https://blends.debian.org/med/tasks/bio-ngs) regularly informs me about
> updates that should be performed to packages I alone maintain or (more
> likely) with the help of my blend. The updat
Adrian Bunk writes ("Re: Auto-update for sid? Auto-backport?"):
> And in general I'd expect from a maintainer that packages are maintained
> not worse than the QA-maintained orphaned packages - for the latter ones
> "easy" incoming bugs are usually handled prop
I took issue with Adrian's phrasing around "disgrace", and had intended
to reply, but didn't.
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 01:20:06PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
I would much rather have a minimally maintained package, from Debian,
in my stable release, than have to roll my own. This is particularly
t
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 06:36:59PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Adrian Bunk writes ("Re: Auto-update for sid? Auto-backport?"):
> > Sometimes I see bug reports in the BTS where it is evident that a user
> > has spent hours or days on debugging an issue and writing a mar
Adrian Bunk writes ("Re: Auto-update for sid? Auto-backport?"):
> Sometimes I see bug reports in the BTS where it is evident that a user
> has spent hours or days on debugging an issue and writing a marvelous
> bug report. I read the bug 10 years later with no other messag
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 01:20:06PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
>...
> I would much rather have a minimally maintained package, from Debian,
> in my stable release, than have to roll my own. This is particularly
> true if I don't know yet whether the thing is what I want. Trying
> something out from
Hi Bálint,
On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 04:34:40AM +0100, Bálint Réczey wrote:
> Hi Guido,
>
> 2017-11-24 12:48 GMT+01:00 Guido Günther :
> > Hi,
> > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 04:31:43PM +0100, Guido Günther wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 04:43:17PM +0100, Steffen Möller wrote:
> >> > Hello
Hi Guido,
2017-11-24 12:48 GMT+01:00 Guido Günther :
> Hi,
> On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 04:31:43PM +0100, Guido Günther wrote:
>> Hi,
>> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 04:43:17PM +0100, Steffen Möller wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > my QA page or our blend's task page (like
>> > https://blends.debian.org/med/t
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 04:31:43PM +0100, Guido Günther wrote:
> Hi,
> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 04:43:17PM +0100, Steffen Möller wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > my QA page or our blend's task page (like
> > https://blends.debian.org/med/tasks/bio-ngs) regularly informs me about
> > updates that shoul
Steffen Möller writes ("Re: Auto-update for sid? Auto-backport?"):
> On 18.11.17 01:12, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> But you are right, an external service is a safe bet as a first start that
> we do not need to vote about - nor would I need to ask ;) However,
> any such autom
Paul Gevers writes ("Re: Auto-update for sid? Auto-backport?"):
> On 17-11-17 20:35, Sean Whitton wrote:
> > Why are such a people a disgrace? So long as they do not refuse the
> > requests of people with more time on their hands to adopt the package,
> > aren&
Hi Jeremy,
On 18.11.17 01:12, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 7:00 PM, Steffen Möller
> wrote:
>> If the positive vibes I have felt are kept up then I propose the
>> individuals running relevant services in/around Debian (ftpmasters, web,
>> backports, mentors, ...) determine what
On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 7:00 PM, Steffen Möller wrote:
> If the positive vibes I have felt are kept up then I propose the
> individuals running relevant services in/around Debian (ftpmasters, web,
> backports, mentors, ...) determine what team then takes that summary to
> transform it into a white
Dear all,
On 15.11.17 16:43, Steffen Möller wrote:
> [question about how to realise auto-updated packages]
>
Thank you tons for all your nice and constructive ideas, experiences and
comments.
My (biased) impression is that there is a majority in favour of some
automation to become an option for
Hello,
On Fri, Nov 17 2017, Paul Gevers wrote:
> On 17-11-17 20:35, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> Why are such a people a disgrace? So long as they do not refuse the
>> requests of people with more time on their hands to adopt the
>> package, aren't they just doing what they can, which is strictly
>> b
Hi Sean,
On 17-11-17 20:35, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Why are such a people a disgrace? So long as they do not refuse the
> requests of people with more time on their hands to adopt the package,
> aren't they just doing what they can, which is strictly better than the
> package receiving no work at a
Hello Adrian,
On Fri, Nov 17 2017, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> We do have DDs who seem to consider "maintaining" their packages to
> consist only of uploading the latest upstream versions and perhaps
> look at RC bugs in their packages (sometimes not even that). IMHO
> such people are a disgrace for De
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 04:43:17PM +0100, Steffen Möller wrote:
> Hello,
>
> my QA page or our blend's task page (like
> https://blends.debian.org/med/tasks/bio-ngs) regularly informs me about
> updates that should be performed to packages I alone maintain or (more
> likely) with the help of my bl
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 04:43:17PM +0100, Steffen Möller wrote:
> Hello,
>
> my QA page or our blend's task page (like
> https://blends.debian.org/med/tasks/bio-ngs) regularly informs me about
> updates that should be performed to packages I alone maintain or (more
> likely) with the help of m
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 07:06:39PM +, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 at 17:02:00 +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 05:53:40PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > > Yes; and semver.org is a formalized system for version numbering stuff.
> > > If upstream has comm
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 03:21:37PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Wow! Thank you for sharing details of this, Jeremy.
indeed! thank you.
> What's
> particularly nice about this is that the upload stage is still manual,
> which satisfies the kind of reasons brought up by Russ and I, but a big
> c
Hello,
On Thu, Nov 16 2017, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Holger Levsen wrote:
>> I've also heard plans (early 2017) that some people in Fedora wanted to start
>> doing such things, but I dont think they have started by now, though I
>> might be wrong on that last bit.
Le jeudi, 16 novembre 2017, 09.03:47 h CET Alexander Wirt a écrit :
> On Wed, 15 Nov 2017, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> > Le mercredi, 15 novembre 2017, 16.43:17 h CET Steffen Möller a écrit :
> > > I would really like to see updates performed in some automated fashion.
> >
> > Debian updates are
Ian Jackson wrote:
> I think it would certainly be a minority of upstreams that we (Debian)
> would want to trust so thoroughly.
And ones that we have comprehensive testsuites & autopkgtests too … :)
Best wishes,
--
,''`.
: :' : Chris Lamb
`. `'` la...@debian.org / c
Holger Levsen writes ("Re: Auto-update for sid? Auto-backport?"):
> and as others have said: the packaging part should be automated, not
> the uploading part. (which means, there should be maintainer review
> inbetween.)
I think part of this thread is exploring the circumsta
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Holger Levsen wrote:
> I've also heard plans (early 2017) that some people in Fedora wanted to start
> doing such things, but I dont think they have started by now, though I
> might be wrong on that last bit. So, clearly, there are others who also
> think that thi
On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 at 17:02:00 +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 05:53:40PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Yes; and semver.org is a formalized system for version numbering stuff.
> > If upstream has committed to it (and does not make mistakes), then the c
> > versions in the
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 05:53:40PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Yes; and semver.org is a formalized system for version numbering stuff.
> If upstream has committed to it (and does not make mistakes), then the c
> versions in the above example MUST (in the RFC definition of that word)
> only cont
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 04:29:38PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst writes ("Re: Auto-update for sid? Auto-backport?"):
> > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 04:41:18PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > > I think Steffen's point was that all the hideousness you are
Andreas Tille writes:
> I think Steffen's point was that all the hideousness you are talking
> about was solved in version a.b.c of the software and if version
> a.b.(c+1) builds and passes our test suite it will most probably not
> have changed.
Oh, yeah, to be clear, I don't have any objection
Wouter Verhelst writes ("Re: Auto-update for sid? Auto-backport?"):
> On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 04:41:18PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > I think Steffen's point was that all the hideousness you are talking
> > about was solved in version a.b.c of the software and i
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 04:41:18PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 10:10:59AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >
> > Distribution packages generated by upstream are usually horrible unless
> > upstream is deeply involved in that distribution community. From the
> > perspective o
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 10:10:59AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> Distribution packages generated by upstream are usually horrible unless
> upstream is deeply involved in that distribution community. From the
> perspective of an experienced packager for that distribution, they are
> usually way b
On Wed, 15 Nov 2017, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> Le mercredi, 15 novembre 2017, 16.43:17 h CET Steffen Möller a écrit :
> > I would really like to see updates performed in some automated fashion.
>
> Debian updates are in fact different steps:
> * inclusion of upstream changes;
> * packaging up
Le mercredi, 15 novembre 2017, 16.43:17 h CET Steffen Möller a écrit :
> I would really like to see updates performed in some automated fashion.
Debian updates are in fact different steps:
* inclusion of upstream changes;
* packaging updates;
* .changes signing with a key in the Debian keyring;
*
PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel
writes:
> Sean Whitton wrote:
>> If an upstream author knows their code will go straight into an active
>> Debian suite when they push a git tag to GitHub, the trust dynamic is
>> changed, I think for the worse.
> this is the model of travis no ?, the upstream could beco
Hello Steffen,
On Wed, Nov 15 2017, Steffen Möller wrote:
> I would really like to see updates performed in some automated
> fashion. Maybe into a different section of Debian like sid-auto? The
> problem with that obviously is the missing scrutiny by the human
> maintainer, so it cannot go strai
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 04:43:17PM +0100, Steffen Möller wrote:
> I would really like to see updates performed in some automated fashion.
I think this is an excelent idea, at least for the case of updates from
eg 2.0.3 to 2.0.4 or some such, and also of course accompanied with
automated tests.
I'
Hello,
my QA page or our blend's task page (like
https://blends.debian.org/med/tasks/bio-ngs) regularly informs me about
updates that should be performed to packages I alone maintain or (more
likely) with the help of my blend. The updates are often (but now
always, admittedly) easy to do.
I would
39 matches
Mail list logo
