On Wed, Feb 16, 2005 at 08:04:21AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: <snip>
Hi Martin, > > source package: dsc + (diff) + orig.tar.gz > binary package: deb > source upload: changes + list of files therein I added some of this to my diagram. not 100% yet. <snip> > nah, we turn software into debian packages by debianising them, and > then using dpkg-genchanges to create the changes file. Please read > its manpage, in particular about the -sa, -sd, and -si options to > see which files the changes file will list. > > the upload consists of the source package and the binary package, > unless the debian revision is greater than 1, in which case the > orig.tar.gz file is not included. I added some of this, too. > > > h. There are more rules as to when packages migrate from unstable to > > > testing. > > > > ACK. I'm not familar with all possibilities and also not sure how much > > space it would take to include it. maybe a 'subprocess' box? > > you could just say "meets requirements for testing" <snip> > > > To get our graphs onto www.debian.org, I assume we file bugs against > > > that pseudo-package. > > > > there is an existing package that could include these? or to make an > > ITP? > > www.debian.org is a pseudo package: > > http://www.debian.org/Bugs/pseudo-packages I saw this[1]. So the bug would be something like: "www.debian.org: needs development diagram from package life cycle (and oh BTW, I have one here[2] and here[3]!)" [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=www.debian.org [2] http://kmark.pipeline.com/newdebian.png [2] http://kmark.pipeline.com/newdebian.dia -Kev -- counter.li.org #238656 -- goto counter.li.org and be counted! (__) (oo) /------\/ / | || * /\---/\ ~~ ~~ ...."Have you mooed today?"...
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
