Upstream release with two source packages
Hi, I'm thinking to package [1]. This package is in the github and upstream release it with two main directories: one with the C++ version (complete) and another with a python binding against the first one. The Python version cannot be built without the C++ version. Can I have in alioth a single repo with two debian packages? Leopold [1] https://github.com/orocos/orocos_kinematics_dynamics -- -- Linux User 152692 GPG: 05F4A7A949A2D9AA Catalonia - A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Upstream release with two source packages
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 9:48 PM, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda wrote: > Can I have in alioth a single repo with two debian packages? How you structure the git repository doesn't have much correlation with what source/binary packages are produced. Feel free to do as you want. If you intend to produce one source package that builds two binary packages, use dh_make --multi when generating the initial packaging from the dh-make templates. If you aren't using dh-make then you simply need two Package stanzas in debian/control. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/caktje6fm4pf4ogfttawyfukp7ucrpvm59qkhwe6czdqoanj...@mail.gmail.com
Bug#780069: RFS: codespell/1.7-1 ITA
On 03/12/2015 05:03 AM, Paul Wise wrote: > On Thu, 2015-03-12 at 00:30 +0100, Peter Spiess-Knafl wrote: > > > If you look at the upstream Makefile you will notice that you also > need to override dh_auto_build as the prefix is used in building > the script. > Fixed. > > That is an incorrect place to build the manual page, you should > build everything in dh_auto_build. The manual page should be built > from the codespell script instead of the codespell.py script, that > will allow you to drop the sed commands you added also. > Fixed. Even though one sed command for deleting the "Usage: ..." string is still required. > Then dh_installman doesn't need to be overridden as you have a > configuration file for it already. Removed the override. > I would suggest not cloning things into /tmp, personally I use the > myrepos tool and I clone codespell into ~/dev/qa/codespell and then > I do my Debian packaging for codespell in > ~/dev/debian/qa/codespell. > myrepos is great tool. Thank you for mentioning it. > Ah, I see. dh_auto_test does not need to be overridden, `make > check` should be run by dh_auto_test by default. > Removed the override. >> It is not contained in the 1.7 release. I added a patch. > > Ok, thanks. The patches need more DEP-3 meta-data, at minimum, Bug > or Forwarded and Applied-Upstream. > > http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep3/ > Did not know about DEP3. I added more information to the patches. >> What tool is that? > > That is Config::Model's cme tool, as run by check-all-the-things, > links: > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2015/03/msg4.html > > https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/collab-maint/check-all-the-things.git > https://packages.debian.org/sid/libconfig-model-dpkg-perl > https://packages.debian.org/sid/libconfig-model-perl > > Package maintainers should be subscribed to debian-devel-announce. > I am subscribed to debian-devel-announce. Started using check-all-the-things today. I will see what I can contribute to that tool. >> Contacted upstream. I will provide a pull-request on github: >> https://github.com/lucasdemarchi/codespell/issues/27#issuecomment-78270203 > >> > One other thing you could ask upstream about is providing a clean > target in the Makefile so that debian/clean can be > removed/reduced. > Already filed a PR: https://github.com/lucasdemarchi/codespell/pull/28 I again uploaded a new version to mentors. Thanks again. Greetings Peter -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5501c843.5050...@skiline.cc
Bug#780368: RFS: pyvisa/1.6.3-1
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I'm wondering if anyone wants to sponsor the package pyvisa? The current version in Debian is 1.4. It is therefore a major leap to 1.6.3. The current maintainer said I should take over since I'm more interested in the package than he is. I've decided to maintain it as part of the Debian Python Modules team. It would be great if someone in the team would like to help me by sponsoring the upload. You'll find the package either on mentors or on alioth (git): - https://mentors.debian.net/package/pyvisa - git://anonscm.debian.org/python-modules/packages/pyvisa.git Thanks a lot in advance! It's of course great if someone in the Python Modules team would help out! Best regards, Ruben -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CA+ChNyUR+UBY=oM2e1rPOaaFpWC-92X-d=mujjyxrfhhzbq...@mail.gmail.com
Please criticize the package I have been working on, https://github.com/pelliott80/simplescreenrecorder-dpm.git
Please criticize the package I have been working on https://github.com/pelliott80/simplescreenrecorder-dpm.git in a git repo in dpm format. I am not the owner of the ITP bug, but the owner knows I am working on it. I plan to submit this work to the ITP bug owner. I want to get it in perfect shape for debian. Package now has no lintian errors, except for lack of PGP signatures, and that is an upstream problem. Best wishes to all, and thank you. -- Paul Elliott 1(512)837-1096 pelli...@blackpatchpanel.com PMB 181, 11900 Metric Blvd Suite J http://www.free.blackpatchpanel.com/pme/ Austin TX 78758-3117 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Upstream release with two source packages
El Divendres, 13 de març de 2015, a les 00:08:07, Paul Wise va escriure: > On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 9:48 PM, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda wrote: > > Can I have in alioth a single repo with two debian packages? > > How you structure the git repository doesn't have much correlation > with what source/binary packages are produced. Feel free to do as you > want. > > If you intend to produce one source package that builds two binary > packages, use dh_make --multi when generating the initial packaging > from the dh-make templates. If you aren't using dh-make then you > simply need two Package stanzas in debian/control. Thanks Paul, I will try to produce two orig packages from the same release of upstream. After some time of train and bike I realized that my original idea has no sense and probably I will have some troubles with pbuilders and company. Leopold -- -- Linux User 152692 GPG: 05F4A7A949A2D9AA Catalonia - A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#780069: marked as done (RFS: codespell/1.7-1 ITA)
Your message dated Fri, 13 Mar 2015 10:58:20 +0800 with message-id <1426215500.17088.74.ca...@debian.org> and subject line Re: Bug#780069: RFS: codespell/1.7-1 ITA has caused the Debian Bug report #780069, regarding RFS: codespell/1.7-1 ITA to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 780069: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=780069 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "codespell" * Package name: codespell Version : 1.7-1 Upstream Author : Lucas de Marchi * URL : https://github.com/lucasdemarchi/codespell * License : GPL-2.0 Section : devel It builds those binary packages: codespell - find and fix common misspellings in text files To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/codespell Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/codespell/codespell_1.7-1.dsc Changes since the last upload: * New upstream release: removed upstream applied patches * New maintainer: mutually agreed adoption * debian/rules: added upstream changelog * debian/watch: point to github releases (Closes: #780014) * debian/control: adding Vcs-* fields * debian/control: bumped Standards-Version to 3.9.6 * debian/copyright: Updated Source and Copyright for debian/* * Added patch to fix install prefix to /usr * Added manpage Regards, Peter Spiess-Knafl --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- On Thu, 2015-03-12 at 18:09 +0100, Peter Spiess-Knafl wrote: > Fixed. Even though one sed command for deleting the "Usage: ..." > string is still required. Ok. You may want to ask upstream to add the chmod to the Makefile. > Did not know about DEP3. I added more information to the patches. Great. > I am subscribed to debian-devel-announce. Started using > check-all-the-things today. I will see what I can contribute to that tool. Awesome! One of the best ways to help is to package the checking tools that are not yet available in Debian. I started that with codespell but I don't think I will have time to package and maintain all of them. > Already filed a PR: https://github.com/lucasdemarchi/codespell/pull/28 Great. Personally I would have split that into two PRs. > I again uploaded a new version to mentors. Checked, built, signed and uploaded to Debian. Thanks for adopting codespell! For future uploads, please file a new RFS and I'll look as I am able. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part --- End Message ---
Re: Please criticize the package I have been working on, https://github.com/pelliott80/simplescreenrecorder-dpm.git
On Thu, 12 Mar 2015 16:42:36 -0500 Paul Elliott wrote: > Please criticize the package I have been working on > https://github.com/pelliott80/simplescreenrecorder-dpm.git > in a git repo in dpm format. Okay, sure. I'm not a DD, so I can't sponsor your package, but I thought that I'd take a look anyway. d/changelog: -Make sure that you use the Debian names, not the Ubuntu names (e.g. "experimental", not "vivid") -Your changelog needs to close the ITP bug. A good entry would be: * Initial release (Closes: #) d/control: -The latest Standards-Version is 3.9.6 -Wrap your lines if they go over 80 characters -Vcs-Git and Vcs-Browser refer to the VCS of the Debian packaging, not of upstream development -Is there any reason that you are limited to i386 and amd64? -Where is simplescreenrecorder-lib? d/copyright: -DEP-5 convention is to use GPL-3+ instead of GPL-3.0+ -Remove the "<" and ">" signs from the "Source:" field. -Include the licensing information for the build files like aclocal.m4, configure, m4/* and build-aux/* -There are some files in glinject/ that are MIT licensed. d/postinst: -What is the point of this file? If you don't need it, remove it. general: -Did Maarten Baert (v2) make the Debian package? In any case, if it's your package, you should be listed as the maintainer. Good luck getting your package into Debian, Riley Baird pgpp4cfI0Nj4x.pgp Description: PGP signature
