Hello, I updated the wiki page listing the status of this project: http://wiki.debian.org/Projects/DebSrc3.0
During debconf I used part of my time to push this project forward. 1/ Lucas did again a rebuild of the archive to discover problems that will appear if all packages are converted to 3.0 (quilt) format. I processed 200 failed build logs and filed some new wishlist bugs to prepare for a global transition (and fixed a sid-only bug in dpkg-source detected thanks to this rebuild). http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?users=hert...@debian.org;tag=3.0-quilt-by-default 2/ I prepared some test source packages covering most interesting cases to try out with various tools, I checked the most important ones (apt-get source, sbuild) and they do cope with it. I encourage you to test all other tools and report your success/failures here (and please file bug for the failures). http://people.debian.org/~hertzog/packages/debsrc3.0/ 3/ I discussed with Jörg Jaspert and Mark Hymers the status of my patch against dak. Currently they plan to merge my patch after they have finished to update dak to use sqlalchemy, but given that this is an intrusive change they will have to test it carefully and Jörg expected that it will still be 2 to 3 months until they can integrate my patch. :-( Both patches/branches are going to conflict so someone will have to handle the merge conflict whatever the merge order is. I offered them to handle it myself even if my patch is merged now (without conflicting with anything since the sqlalchemy one is not yet ready/merged). The sqlalchemy rewrite is not yet public but Mark hopes to publish it this week-end (1-2 Aug). After my upcoming vacation, and if I still can't convince ftpmasters to merge my working branch immediately I'll create a new branch of my patch merged with the new sqlalchemy branch so that they have a chance to push both changes at the same time (or in the order that they want). This dak modification is the main blocker point for this project to go forward (and has been so for quite some time already). 4/ I discussed with Luk Claes if anything had to be done on the buildd side. There's not much to be done there since the new sbuild is working well with new source formats but there are still some buildd using the old version. Those have to be updated to the new sbuild and this process has been ongoing for quite some time already. I pinged some of the concerned buildd maintainers and provided sample buildd logs generated by the new sbuild with the new source formats so that they can adapt their build logs processing scripts immediately. 5/ In all cases, I hope we will enable support of new source formats in squeeze so that individual packages can switch to it (in particular bigger packages that would benefit from the multi-tarball thingie). But depending on the time left before the freeze, we might not start a global transition to the new formats (i.e. I would not modify dpkg-source to produce newer source formats when there's no debian/source/format). Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
