On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 16:17, Lucas Nussbaum <lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net> wrote: > On 28/08/11 at 10:27 +0530, karim memon wrote: >> > >> > So please don't upload. Ruby is API mess even without multiple rails >> > versions. >> > >> > > Hi, >> > > >> > > I haven't looked at the package, but I know that Ondřej Surý has been >> > > doing some work on rails-related packages, so maybe he would like to >> > > have a look (Added to Cc). >> > > >> > > Also, I was wondering what should be our plans for Rails in wheezy (2.3 >> > > vs 3.0). What do people think? (I'm clueless about rails) >> > > >> > > Lucas >> > >> >> So do i need to stop working on this package? and what about the ITP, what >> should it be retitled to?
I would love to have somebody to help me. But there's a big BUT! Rails is not the fire&forget type of packages, so you need to commit to support the packages for a longer time. > It only means that it's not that simple. Please talk to Ondrej to see > what needs to be done, and how you can help. If you are really interested in helping with rails, then I have a great task for you :). I have a couple of CVEs pending to be applied for rails-2.3 in stable and oldstable. It would be great if you can help me preparing the security upload - means cherry-picking the needed patches, adding them to the git repository and at least a basic testing if the applications depending on rails in the stable works. After that I would suggest packaging 3.1.rc8 as ruby-<gemname>-3.1 and uploading to experimental. You should also check the ruby-<gemname>-2.3 packages in the pkg-ruby-extras git tree. And (!) you should double check your packages before asking for upload, I have found at least three errors in your package: - debian/docs: README.rdoc not installed - debian/copyright: License not indented - debian/control: missing dependencies (gem2deb correctly added a comment line); not versioned dependencies, you need to match the rails gems versions - check the ruby-active*-2.3 packages for control.in -> control generation in debian/rules > From now on, I will only sponsor new packages (not already in Debian) > if the requester has done some of the "collective" tasks listed on > that page. I don't think that it's a too hard policy: handling new > upstream releases is generally quite easy, for example. The applies for rails-* as well. My workload is already something between 150%-200% and I really don't need more packages uploaded by DD or DM who lost interest in maintaining them in few weeks. (Please don't take this personally this is really a generic observation from an old fart^H^H^H^H Debian Developer. Happened to me with some packages as well.) O. -- Ondřej Surý <ond...@sury.org> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CALjhHG9ydGTL2m=E_dSucuA2Mo8RnU5WSV+9crhwBL-p=gw...@mail.gmail.com
