On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 10:01:39PM -0700, tony mancill wrote:
> > For now, we need to change watch files manually as it seems.
>
> I know it's a bit of a hassle, but this should be a quick update. I
> like the idea of touching each package at least once per release cycle.
I also think we should update packages drained from github soonish after
uploads to unstable are possible again. I think the easiest way to
accomplish this is to fix the watch file via routine-update before it is
calling uscan. I admit I'm undecided to what string we should replace
broken expressions - may be we simply go with the suggested one in
uscan(1)? In any case I fixed the package template[1] to this
expression some time ago.
For the moment I made routine-update fail when the broken uscan
expression is used[2]. If you agree than I could try some automatic
fixing to the expression of uscan(1) and we'll see how far we can go
with this.
My next step would be to work down the list of packages that matches
my local repositories matching
grep 'github.*/archive/' */debian/watch
For the moment I get
grep -l 'github.*/archive/' */debian/watch | wc -l
348
which is not complete since I do not have a complete set of repositories
on my local disk. But its a rough estimation and I think its below 400.
So if we upload in a "one routine-update run per day" we'll be through
all packages in one year or so which should be OKish.
> This time around we might need to average more than once... :)
Yep. :-)
> Thank you for mentioning this task on the list.
+1
Kind regards
Andreas.
[1]
https://salsa.debian.org/med-team/community/package_template/-/blob/master/debian/watch#L22
[2]
https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/routine-update/-/commit/15e0349a792f3eb0ca87a798c3157d977e92bc4a
--
http://fam-tille.de
