El 26/11/08 12:27 Felipe Sateler escribió:
> OK, so I'm about to co-maintain liblo, which is an OSC library, and can be
> considered a multimedia package (csound, rosegarden and ardour are some
> "big" packages using it).
> So... I want to bring it under the scope of the teams-to-become-one. I have
HI Reinhard,
|--==> On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 23:18:56 +0100, Reinhard Tartler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
>>We would still be compliant with the git-buildpackage standards, but
>>we would simply have more branches than only master and upstream.
RT> I did not (yet) have a look at git-buildpackage
Free Ekanayaka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>As said, I would stick to the git-buildpackage standards, that means a
> >>git branch for upstream sources, which can get imported with
> >>git-import-orig
>
> LM> Sounds right!
>
> We would still be compliant with the git-buildpackage standa
El 01/12/08 05:36 Reinhard Tartler escribió:
> (did you mail me in private on purpose? if not, feel free to quote
> anything in this mail in public)
Oops, no, that was an accident. Replying to list now for completeness sake.
>
> Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > El 30/11/08 15:07 Rei
Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> The sanest way would be to move the libswscale repository back to
>> ffmpeg. That however would break bisecting, so they insist on rewriting
>> the ffmpeg svn repository so seamlessly integrate the development
>> history. This is a tedious job Diego i
El 30/11/08 04:32 Reinhard Tartler escribió:
> Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > There's also git-cvsimport, which I used for a while. However, the import
> > stage is very slow, since it is done over the net. Subsequent updates are
> > very slow too (unless one keeps the cvsimport upd
Hi,
|--==> On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 18:47:54 +0100, Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
LM> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008, Free Ekanayaka wrote:
>>demudi has already a repo on git.debian.org, and I prefer it over
>>collab-maint because the latter is writable only by DDs (for non-DDs
>>you have to ask
Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There's also git-cvsimport, which I used for a while. However, the import
> stage is very slow, since it is done over the net. Subsequent updates are
> very slow too (unless one keeps the cvsimport updated very frequently). The
> problem is that one
El 29/11/08 17:41 Reinhard Tartler escribió:
> Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> For point 1: How often do you "snapshot" upstream? Every upstream commit
> >> of their VCS or only upstream releases? What to do with upstreams that
> >> don't do commits in years? (think ffmpeg, toolame)
Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> For point 1: How often do you "snapshot" upstream? Every upstream commit
>> of their VCS or only upstream releases? What to do with upstreams that
>> don't do commits in years? (think ffmpeg, toolame).
>
> In our case, we track upstream releases only,
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008, Free Ekanayaka wrote:
> demudi has already a repo on git.debian.org, and I prefer it over
> collab-maint because the latter is writable only by DDs (for non-DDs
> you have to ask for write permission on case-by-case basis), while the
> former is writable by all the members of
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008, Felipe Sateler wrote:
> In the case of ffmpeg, where there are no released
> tarballs, it would make sense to directly track the git repository (ie, the
> upstream branch is a clone of upstream's master branch). In either
> case, "upstream" releases sh
Hi Felipe,
|--==> On Sat, 22 Nov 2008 15:15:16 -0300, Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
>>Key facts here:
>>
>>- upstream branch *tracking* upstream
>>- patch management using quilt.
>>
>>For point 1: How often do you "snapshot" upstream? Every upstream commit
>>of their VCS
OK, so I'm about to co-maintain liblo, which is an OSC library, and can be
considered a multimedia package (csound, rosegarden and ardour are some "big"
packages using it).
So... I want to bring it under the scope of the teams-to-become-one. I have
imported the sources into a git repository. dem
Reinhard Tartler schrieb:
I have mixed feelings. on the one hand, this surely seems to be a great
idea to improve debian. On the other hand, I'd like to avoid to avoid to
clutter our set of maintained packages (and therefore the debian
archive) with substandard packages nobody cares for anymore.
Fabian Greffrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It might be a little bit off-topic, but I've seen some initial effort in
> our SVN recently (i.e. gmerlin) and would like to propose this as a
> general long-term objective: As a united debian-multimedia team, let's
> try to get as much packages as po
It might be a little bit off-topic, but I've seen some initial effort
in our SVN recently (i.e. gmerlin) and would like to propose this as a
general long-term objective: As a united debian-multimedia team, let's
try to get as much packages as possible from Marilllat's archive into
Debian. I bel
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> - document this in the "static news" section of the PTS
>(cf. developers reference, section 4.10.4. The PTS Interface)
> - use [EMAIL PROTECTED] as maintainer list
> - subscribe the pkg-multimedia-maint list here, so that the bugs and
>arch
Dear all,
Reinhard Tartler schrieb:
Loïc, Fabian, Comments?
Sorry, I didn't follow the recent discussion closely.
We are going to merge both multimedia teams in Debian. Great, I am all
for it! I am interested at least in audacity and will take the
opportunity to have a closer look a
El 22/11/08 05:47 Reinhard Tartler escribió:
> Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I think it avoids confusion to have a single list. If later on it shows
> > to be a problem, the list can be split. Maintaining both lists from the
> > start sounds like preemptive optimization to me.
>
>
I haven't said the following aloud yet, because I wanted to discuss this
seperatly from the merging discussion. But that topic was rised in part
of that discussion, I'm replying to that part seperatly with a new
subject. Please read this mal al an RFC.
Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think it avoids confusion to have a single list. If later on it shows to be
> a problem, the list can be split. Maintaining both lists from the start
> sounds like preemptive optimization to me.
Ok, with that having in mind, I'm OK with using a c
El 21/11/08 16:18 Reinhard Tartler escribió:
> Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> I think the same could work with the "common" multimedia team as well:
> >>
> >> debian-multimedia@lists.debian.org: "General Discussion"
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]: "bug flow, etc"
> >>
> >> However, I woul
Le Fri 21 Nov 08 à 20:18 +0100, Reinhard Tartler a écrit :
>
> >>
> >> http://wiki.tauware.de/misc:vcs-packaging
> >> http://wiki.tauware.de/misc:vcs-packaging2
> >
> > You might want to look at vcs-pkg.org
I'm also in favor of switching to a vcs dealing better with branch and
the only modern vcs
Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Still having a (common) dedicated multimedia maintainer's team would
>> group a set of people interested in a set of related packages. I think
>> this is a desirable goal.
>
> Having a common list is motivating. Activity generates more activity, IME.
El 21/11/08 07:19 Reinhard Tartler escribió:
> Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > El 23/04/08 06:09 Fabian Greffrath escribió:
> >> I believe we could start merging the efforts of both the
> >> pkg-multimedia-maintainers and the debian-multimedia groups into one
> >> bigger project, alt
Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> El 23/04/08 06:09 Fabian Greffrath escribió:
>> I believe we could start merging the efforts of both the
>> pkg-multimedia-maintainers and the debian-multimedia groups into one
>> bigger project, although the current scopes of both projects are
>> sligh
Hi Free,
The main point of merging the two projects for me would be have a
single project more active and more visible, which can possibly
attract more developers (that's what is needed now by d-m).
After a merger, we could identify which multimedia packages are
maintained by DD's that are me
Hi,
|--==> On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:38:11 -0300, Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
FS> El 23/04/08 06:09 Fabian Greffrath escribió:
>>I believe we could start merging the efforts of both the
>>pkg-multimedia-maintainers and the debian-multimedia groups into one
>>bigger project, alt
El 23/04/08 06:09 Fabian Greffrath escribió:
> I believe we could start merging the efforts of both the
> pkg-multimedia-maintainers and the debian-multimedia groups into one
> bigger project, although the current scopes of both projects are
> slightly different. Since this has allready been sugges
Felipe Sateler wrote:
On Thursday 24 April 2008 08:36:52 Joost Yervante Damad wrote:
In my opinion the packages would be better served if they just had
individual maintainers assigned. This is one of the reasons I removed my
timidity package from the debian-multimedia team.
I think packages wo
On Thursday 24 April 2008 11:31:41 tim hall wrote:
> Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> > Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>> If the debian-multimedia team is indeed dead, we should avoid setting
> >>> it in the maintainer field of any package. Nobody is served with
> >>> unreachable (or non-ex
On Thursday 24 April 2008 08:36:52 Joost Yervante Damad wrote:
> In my opinion the packages would be better served if they just had
> individual maintainers assigned. This is one of the reasons I removed my
> timidity package from the debian-multimedia team.
I think packages would be better served
And a further "while we're at it":
The debian-multimedia WNPP list
http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia/DevelopPackaging
cheers,
tim
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reinhard Tartler wrote:
Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
If the debian-multimedia team is indeed dead, we should avoid setting it
in the maintainer field of any package. Nobody is served with
unreachable (or non-existant) maintainers.
Note that the (some?) maintainers are still active
Reinhard Tartler wrote:
Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
If the debian-multimedia team is indeed dead, we should avoid setting it
in the maintainer field of any package. Nobody is served with
unreachable (or non-existant) maintainers.
Note that the (some?) maintainers are still active
Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> If the debian-multimedia team is indeed dead, we should avoid setting it
>> in the maintainer field of any package. Nobody is served with
>> unreachable (or non-existant) maintainers.
>
> Note that the (some?) maintainers are still active AFAICS, it's
On Wednesday 23 April 2008 03:59:55 Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I tried to maintain the csound package within the debian-multimedia team,
> > but it seemed pretty much dead, which is why I moved out.
> > OTOH, if what you say is right, maybe I tried in
Hi Fabian,
If there' still documentation referring to these obsolete sites, please
point the doc authors to this fact (e.g. by filing bug reports).
I do that whenever I see it, but there's a lot of old information out there.
For
64studio, I have to admit I don't know the differences between
Hi Daniel,
Daniel James schrieb:
Perhaps all interested parties can regroup somehow. A lot of the related
information online is out of date, which doesn't help people take part.
http://www.demudi.org/ is no longer used, http://www.agnula.org is long
gone. Several Debian docs still refer to th
Hi Fabian,
AFAIUI the debian-multimedia team is more focussed on applications while
the pkg-multimedia-maintainers team ist focussed on libraries.
There is no further connection between those two teams, which is a pity
if you ask me...
Perhaps all interested parties can regroup somehow. A l
Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tuesday 22 April 2008 05:12:28 tim hall wrote:
>> Gürkan Sengün wrote:
>> > Hello
>> >
>> > I had created a list of all teams findable for the period of the year
>> > 2007: http://krum.ethz.ch/ddc/teams-of-2007.txt
>> >
>> > Is there a reason why the
Felipe Sateler schrieb:
I'm not really sure this is right:
% grep-aptavail -FMaintainer,Uploaders
debian-multimedia@lists.debian.org -sPackage | wc -l
AFAIUI the debian-multimedia team is more focussed on applications
while the pkg-multimedia-maintainers team ist focussed on libraries.
Ther
I'd like to see the alioth projects merged too:
http://alioth.debian.org/projects/demudi/
http://alioth.debian.org/projects/pkg-multimedia/
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROT
On Tuesday 22 April 2008 05:12:28 tim hall wrote:
> Gürkan Sengün wrote:
> > Hello
> >
> > I had created a list of all teams findable for the period of the year
> > 2007: http://krum.ethz.ch/ddc/teams-of-2007.txt
> >
> > Is there a reason why there's two multimedia groups in Debian?
> >
> > Is ther
Gürkan Sengün wrote:
Hello
I had created a list of all teams findable for the period of the year 2007:
http://krum.ethz.ch/ddc/teams-of-2007.txt
Is there a reason why there's two multimedia groups in Debian?
Is there a chance or interest to merge them together?
are you referring to the fact
Hello
I had created a list of all teams findable for the period of the year 2007:
http://krum.ethz.ch/ddc/teams-of-2007.txt
Is there a reason why there's two multimedia groups in Debian?
Is there a chance or interest to merge them together?
Yours,
Gürkan
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PR
47 matches
Mail list logo
