> That makes sense, yes - but where can one find the original source archive?
> Below, you are speaking of some upstream changes since 0.5.0, hence there
> should
> be some newer version of that upstream archive!?
I've just re-uploaded the latest version of Naev (along with my most
up-to-date pac
Hi again,
> Hi Michael,
>
> Thanks for the review. Please also consider reviewing my most
> up-to-date packaging in the Debian Games svn repository; my Naev
> packaging at mentors.d.n is heavily outdated at the moment, mostly
> because I'm getting tired of having to upload a 200 MB tarball every
Hi,
> Dear mentors,
>
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "cmsmadesimple".
>
> * Package name: cmsmadesimple
> Version : 1.9.4.1-1
> Upstream Author : Ted Kulp, t...@cmsmadesimple.org
> * URL : http://www.cmsmadesimple.org
> * License : mixed: GPL-2+,
Hi,
> Dear mentors,
>
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "torrentflux-b4rt".
>
> * Package name: torrentflux-b4rt
> Version : 1.0-beta2-1
> Upstream Author : Many, listed in copyright file
> * URL : http://tf-b4rt.berlios.de/
> * License : GPL-2.0+
>
Hi Michael,
Thanks for the review. Please also consider reviewing my most
up-to-date packaging in the Debian Games svn repository; my Naev
packaging at mentors.d.n is heavily outdated at the moment, mostly
because I'm getting tired of having to upload a 200 MB tarball every
time I want to make a m
Hi,
> I am looking for a sponsor for my packages "naev" and "naev-data".
>
> * Package name: naev, naev-data
> Version : 0.4.2-1
> Upstream Author : Edgar Simo "bobbens"
> Nikola Whallon <6.satur...@gmail.com>
> Josiah Schwartfeger
>
Hi,
[...]
>
> Can you check the package again.
>
I've got a few questions concerning your changes, which aren't necessarily bugs,
but at least I'd like to see the rationale.
- The most recent policy version is 3.9.2; why did you update to 3.9.1 only?
- Why has the priority been changed to extr
Hi Roger,
[...]
Thanks a lot for updating your package. I've reviewed your changes and it looks
mostly fine, except for one issue:
>
> Lintian run as "lintian -iIE --pedantic" gives the following output:
>
> W: mosquitto source: debhelper-overrides-need-versioned-build-depends
> (>= 7.0.50~)
[
On Sat, Jul 09, 2011 at 02:57:20PM -0700, Hamish wrote:
> +dfsg into version name:
> as our build will be bit-for-bit identical to one built from a non-
> stripped version of the source (the only difference between the
> source tarballs being unused mac/windows dirs), I don't see a
> point in addin
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "mosquitto". It has already
been sponsored once - this is an updated version. The new version
fixes bug 632589 and bumps the upstream version to the latest version.
* Package name: mosquitto
Version : 0.11.3-1
Upstream Author :
Anton wrote:
> 1. Since we are using dfsg tarball I think the version
> should include "+dfsg" otherwise my pbuilder fails to find
> the tarball. I have added this to changelog.
+dfsg into version name:
as our build will be bit-for-bit identical to one built from a non-
stripped version of the sou
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 07:29:52AM -0700, Hamish wrote:
> an update on ITP progress for the OpenCPN software (opencpn.org).
Another update about OpenCPN package.
debian directory in svn is updated to build against 2.4.708,
there where problems with tinyxml patch and I fixed them.
1. Since we ar
On Sat, 09 Jul 2011, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> My point to give arguments about not using dh was *not* to start a troll
> thread about what is best practices. It was simply to tell that there
> are some arguments for and against using dh, and as a consequence, I
> found very bad to write in this list
Hi Fabrizio,
On Fri, Jul 08, 2011 at 01:07:04PM +0200, Fabrizio Regalli wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-07-08 at 13:03 +0200, Fabrizio Regalli wrote:
> > On Fri, 2011-07-08 at 12:58 +0200, Fabrizio Regalli wrote:
> > > Dear mentors,
> > >
> > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "usb-imagewriter".
>
Hi Luis,
On Fri, Jul 08, 2011 at 07:17:06PM +0100, Luis Henriques wrote:
> Ok, so I re-worked the package and uploaded a new version into mentors:
>
> dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/x/xxxterm/xxxterm_1.399-1.dsc
Thanks!
Even though I've not found a debian/copyright info for *.p
On 07/09/2011 04:26 PM, Kilian Krause wrote:
>> Updated package pushed to git://git.debian.org/collab-maint/libpar2.git
>> and available at mentors:
>> dget
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libpar2/libpar2_0.2-2.dsc
>
> that version still seems to lack that mentioned fix.
Mentors does
On 09/07/11 13:53, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> If you are writing that using dh is more easy than using "normal" debhelper,
> then I don't agree, it's not always the case. I've seen many overly
> complicated
> packages with tons of dh_overwrite_* stuff, which makes the work flow very
> complicated and
Hi Andreas,
On Sat, Jul 09, 2011 at 03:50:11PM +0200, Andreas Moog wrote:
> On 07/09/2011 12:38 AM, Andreas Moog wrote:
> [...]
> > Or, what would be even easier, I could just ignore the lintian warning
> > for now, file a wishlist bug against the package once it's built and go
> > from there with
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> Don't get me wrong, in my opinion (some of) these things are "good". But
> making a big fuss about them is not helping anybody. It only distracts
> attention from things that are important, and creates false impression that
> they are somehow cru
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 08, 2011 at 04:02:08PM +0200, shuerhaaken wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "xnoise".
>
> * Package name: xnoise
> Version : 0.1.26-1
> Upstream Author : Jörn Magens
> * URL : http://code.google.com/p/xnoise/
> * Licen
On 07/09/2011 12:38 AM, Andreas Moog wrote:
[...]
> Or, what would be even easier, I could just ignore the lintian warning
> for now, file a wishlist bug against the package once it's built and go
> from there with the (future) cleaned up api?
After a small discussion on IRC, this is what I will d
Thomas Goirand writes:
> On 07/09/2011 05:14 AM, Gergely Nagy wrote:
>> I believe that when someone knows the underlying system, using helpers
>> is the way to go, because it makes not only your task easier, it also
>> makes it easier for others to understand the packaging.
>>
> We were talkin
Hi,
"Sebastian H." writes:
>> You should now get a mail from the archive that your package is NEW and will
>> require FTPmaster approval before officially listed in the archive.
>
> Got it and found the package in the NEW queue.
> http://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html
>
> It shows "source" and "i
On 07/09/2011 05:14 AM, Gergely Nagy wrote:
> I believe that when someone knows the underlying system, using helpers
> is the way to go, because it makes not only your task easier, it also
> makes it easier for others to understand the packaging.
>
We were talking about mentoring, and you are ta
On 07/09/2011 05:41 AM, Leo "costela" Antunes wrote:
> On 08/07/11 22:23, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>
>> On 07/08/2011 08:47 PM, Scott Howard wrote:
>>
>>> Right now, the general consensus is the dh and cdbs produce
>>> debian packages that are easier to maintain in the long run (if the
>>> spo
Hi Kilian
The whole point for the 0.12.1 release was to make Debian
integration smoother. Since most things seem to work now I've
uploaded the tarball to the SF project page. uscan still doesn't
find it but that's probably because the SF mirrors are not
synchronized, yet.
Yes, that's to be exp
* Leo costela Antunes [110708 23:41]:
> Please use dh/cdbs/whatever other means necessary to make your packaging
> work easy to read and understand. Don't make the packaging more complex
> for other people just because you want to "know what's going on".
But please also do not use anything you do
* Arno Töll , 2011-07-09, 11:13:
Automatically running code from random people sounds rather risky to me.
...
And now you're even giving them root rights! I suppose this is out of
the question.
Well, this is not necessarily a problem. There are enough possibilities
to come over this problem
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Sven,
On 09.07.2011 10:36, Sven Joachim wrote:
> On 2011-07-09 10:20 +0200, Reijo Tomperi wrote:
> Automatically running code from random people sounds rather risky to me.
...
> And now you're even giving them root rights! I suppose this is out of
Sven Joachim wrote:
And now you're even giving them root rights! I suppose this is out of
the question.
Is it impossible to setup a sandbox where this is done? Isolate it from
everything, except from some trivial output mechanism which will give
the results back to service.
--
Reijo
--
On 2011-07-09 10:20 +0200, Reijo Tomperi wrote:
> We could have a service where we submit the package. That service will
> then run some checks for it. E.g.
> - building the package
Automatically running code from random people sounds rather risky to me.
> - lintian check.
> - install & uninstal
Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
We do have part of the upload on m.d.n, I have a hunch it'd be fairly
simple to actually run Lintian on it, and report the status of the
package.
I second this.
We could have a service where we submit the package. That service will
then run some checks for it. E.g.
32 matches
Mail list logo
