Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

[Craig Sanders]

On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 10:31:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 02:10:22PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> >  * What do you think are the three big things Debian should achieve
> >over the next twelve months?
> 
> In no particular order:
> 
> * Fish or cut bait with respect to non-free, and pass any constitutional
>   amendments necessary to permit us to make that choice;

this seems a bit more definite than your previous statements on this
topic.

do you intend to take any action to have non-free removed from the
debian archives? (this is a yes or no question, but feel free to make
comments after answering yes or no).

craig


--
craig sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

  GnuPG Key: 1024D/CD5626F0 
Key fingerprint: 9674 7EE2 4AC6 F5EF 3C57  52C3 EC32 6810 CD56 26F0


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

[Peter Makholm]

Craig Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> > * Fish or cut bait with respect to non-free, and pass any constitutional
> >   amendments necessary to permit us to make that choice;
> 
> this seems a bit more definite than your previous statements on this
> topic.

Well. Do you want a project leader who doesn't care about the out-come
of an general resoulution?

I see the above as a statement that we should get the problem settled
and then move on. Whatever Branden thinks is the _right_ solution is
irrelevant for the question if he thinks that _a_ solution must be
found in the next year.

(I hope no matter whom gets to be the next project leader and what the
out-come of a generel resolution is, that we could stop discussiong it
at least for the next couple of releases. But that's probally another
discussion) 

-- 
Free beer får det bedste frem i en pingvin.
http://peter.makholm.net/beer/


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

[Sven LUTHER]

On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 10:31:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> html2latexConvert HTML markup to LaTeX markup
> 
>   Hrm, I don't actually use this.  I should probably remove it.  The
>   license is quite definitely non-free.  Can someone suggest
>   alternatives?  We could also attempt contacting the author, Nathan
>   Torkington.  It was copyrighted 7 years ago, and the profile of
>   free licensing has risen considerably since then.

Well, you could try out hevea, it is in main (at least in unstable) and should
do what you like :

 Package: hevea
 Version: 1.05-4+png
 Section: tex
 Priority: optional
 Architecture: i386
 Depends: libc6 (>= 2.2.1-2), libncurses5, gs, netpbm, tetex-bin, dvips
 Suggests: netpbm-nonfree
 Installed-Size: 1268
 Maintainer: Ralf Treinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 Description: A fast and powerful LaTeX to HTML translator
  HeVeA is a LaTeX to HTML translator. Its remarkable features are
   - It produces good output. By default (can be turned off) it uses the
 symbol face for math symbols. Either way it usually avoids generating
 zillions of picture files.
   - It is highly configurable through (La)TeX macros. Though aimed at
 LaTeX input it understands a fair subset of TeX' macro language.
   - It runs fast.
  This version of HeVeA is patched to generate by default PNG picture
  files instead of GIF.
  .
  See also http://para.inria.fr/~maranget/hevea/index.html.

Friendly,

Sven Luther


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

[Adrian Bunk]

On Wed, 7 Mar 2001, Sven LUTHER wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 10:31:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > html2latexConvert HTML markup to LaTeX markup
> >
> > Hrm, I don't actually use this.  I should probably remove it.  The
> > license is quite definitely non-free.  Can someone suggest
> > alternatives?  We could also attempt contacting the author, Nathan
> > Torkington.  It was copyrighted 7 years ago, and the profile of
> > free licensing has risen considerably since then.
>
> Well, you could try out hevea, it is in main (at least in unstable) and should
> do what you like :
>
>  Package: hevea
>...
>  Description: A fast and powerful LaTeX to HTML translator
>...


hevea is exactly the opposite (LaTeX -> HTML) of html2latex ...


> Friendly,
>
> Sven Luther

cu
Adrian

-- 

Nicht weil die Dinge schwierig sind wagen wir sie nicht,
sondern weil wir sie nicht wagen sind sie schwierig.


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

[Seth Arnold]

* Sven LUTHER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010307 01:49]:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 10:31:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > html2latexConvert HTML markup to LaTeX markup
[...]
>  Package: hevea
[...]
>  Description: A fast and powerful LaTeX to HTML translator
[...]

Nice thought but wrong direction.

-- 
Earthlink: The #1 provider of unsolicited bulk email to the Internet.


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[PRE-BALLOT] Leader Election 2001

[Acting Debian Project Secretary]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

This is a test ballot.  If it works for you, great, but my preliminary
tests indicate that there are likely to be problems.  Please save a
copy of your ballot so that you can re-submit it in the event of mail
system problems.

 PRE-CALL FOR VOTES

Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC Mar 28, 2001

This vote is being conducted as required by the Debian Constitution.  For
voting questions only contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]  

HOW TO VOTE

Do not erase anything between the lines below and do not change the
choice names.


In the brackets next to your preferred choice, place a 1. Place
a 2 in the brackets next to your next choice. Continue till
you reach your last choice. You may leave choices you consider
unacceptable blank. Start with 1, don't skip any numbers, don't
repeat. To vote "no, no matter what" do not leave an option
black but rank "Further Discussion" higher than the unacceptable
choices.

Then mail the ballot to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Just
Replying to this message should work, but check the "To:" line.
Don't worry about spacing of the columns or any quote characters
(">") that your reply inserts. NOTE: The vote must be PGP signed
with your key that is in the debian keyring

- -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
[   ] Choice 1: Branden Robinson
[   ] Choice 2: Anand Kumria
[   ] Choice 3: Ben Collins
[   ] Choice 4: Bdale Garbee
[   ] Choice 5: None Of The Above

- -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

- - Raul Miller
  (Acting Debian Project Secretary)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iQEVAwUBOqYljvK/+Baey4gJAQFbmwf/aeFjGWxV3ydznrZBnXQwHzWTau1IQrNe
fuEKNwGGjx+3rDtrSYXPDgYcdMbCgcolGa95yTzHjtpF23P6mLXLdiUb9VuzIeN+
D3Hj3Teibn1+7In8mso5mJnJJm32SOl1bLDCpPkXMcVd0eCC0p50B9Oo/DwW8rNB
C6k64KsAmXZgP6qu5bQv/DwVyVD64/USwnXM1Id5rGX2vFjxyxJ4TFCDSp6nEfPd
0ok7lN9B/1voNYAeX8YufKQQg6tDuWkKk098ncMFugW9obiMTApiMStsuehGUOxA
yLgHplYlTKRu7ZJdh8Rr8+4pi8Blll9Yy86fqktqXl9AvHZf8QdJ4A==
=4ir8
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [PRE-BALLOT] Leader Election 2001

[Hamish Moffatt]

On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 12:34:58PM -, Acting Debian Project Secretary wrote:
> In the brackets next to your preferred choice, place a 1. Place
> a 2 in the brackets next to your next choice. Continue till
> you reach your last choice. You may leave choices you consider
> unacceptable blank. Start with 1, don't skip any numbers, don't
> repeat. To vote "no, no matter what" do not leave an option
> black but rank "Further Discussion" higher than the unacceptable
> choices.
> 
>[...] 
> - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> [   ] Choice 1: Branden Robinson
> [   ] Choice 2: Anand Kumria
> [   ] Choice 3: Ben Collins
> [   ] Choice 4: Bdale Garbee
> [   ] Choice 5: None Of The Above
> 
> - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

There IS no "Further Discussion" option...


Hamish
-- 
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [PRE-BALLOT] Leader Election 2001

[Martin Schulze]

I guess it is acceptable to use GPG instead of PGP as written in the ballot?

Regards,

Joey

-- 
GNU does not eliminate all the world's problems, only some of them.
-- The GNU Manifesto


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

administrivia Re: [PRE-BALLOT] Leader Election 2001

[Raul Miller]

Thanks for the corrections.

On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 12:19:22AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > repeat. To vote "no, no matter what" do not leave an option
> > black but rank "Further Discussion" higher than the unacceptable
> > choices.
...
> > [   ] Choice 5: None Of The Above
...
> There IS no "Further Discussion" option...

I'll change that to "None Of The Above" in the release ballot.

On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 02:26:27PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> I guess it is acceptable to use GPG instead of PGP as written in the ballot?

I'll make an explicit note that GPG is preferred and PGP may be used
as an alternative in the release ballot.

Thanks again,

-- 
Raul


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [PRE-BALLOT] Leader Election 2001

[Jason Gunthorpe]

On Wed, 7 Mar 2001, Martin Schulze wrote:

> I guess it is acceptable to use GPG instead of PGP as written in the ballot?

Unless Raul has altered the vote system..

The vote system uses my mail gateway wrapper script which is used by the
db.debian.org mail gateways and others. It accepts any mail signed by a
key that GPG can parse (so PGP2 and OpenPGP keys). Further, it requires
that the key being used is in the official keyring, and listed at
db.debian.org. It also requires that your local clock is not more than 1
week off.

It will accept any given message exactly once. It records messages it has
seen before and rejects them if sent a second time. Each person gets 1
vote, no matter how many keys they have. The vote system allows you to
recast your ballot as many times as you like, and the mailgateway enforces
a strict ordering (so an attacker cannot resend an old ballot from you)

If you are uncertain about which PGP keys you have registered, please try
finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]

And it will send them to you. I think it is probably too late for anyone
to get a new key registered, so please vote with the keys you have.

Jason


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: ballot bounced

[Sam Hartman]

It looks like ~maor/dinstall/debian-keyring.gpg hasn't changed since
April 2000.  Is the intent to prevent maintainers who are not around
for at least a year from voting or is this a bug?



To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 03:41:18 +
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Vote Mail failed: Unable to check the signature or the signature was invalid:

Hello!

Your ballot to the vote system is malformed, or an internal processing
error occured. The information below may help you, or the vote
administrator to identify the problem.

Error: Unable to check the signature or the signature was invalid:
==> Message Error: Unable to verify signature, signing key missing.


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: ballot bounced

[Raul Miller]

On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 10:51:03PM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
> It looks like ~maor/dinstall/debian-keyring.gpg hasn't changed since
> April 2000.  Is the intent to prevent maintainers who are not around
> for at least a year from voting or is this a bug?

It's worse than that.

I hope people are saving their ballots -- not a single vote has
registered in the db yet.

I'm trying to get the thing working, but I didn't write the code
originally, and it's acting up.  [It feels like there's a problem with
the qmail -> exim transition as well as the key recognition problem.]

Another note:  Darren is somewhat available, and I've been asking him
questions, but nothing has panned out from that direction.

Thanks,

-- 
Raul


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: ballot bounced

[Jason Gunthorpe]

On Wed, 7 Mar 2001, Raul Miller wrote:

> > It looks like ~maor/dinstall/debian-keyring.gpg hasn't changed since
> > April 2000.  Is the intent to prevent maintainers who are not around
> > for at least a year from voting or is this a bug?
> 
> It's worse than that.

The cannonical location of the keyring on all debian.org machines is
/org/kering.debian.org/
 
> I'm trying to get the thing working, but I didn't write the code
> originally, and it's acting up.  [It feels like there's a problem with
> the qmail -> exim transition as well as the key recognition problem.]

I belive the system was tested after that transition.

Jason


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: ballot bounced

[Brian Russo]

On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 09:21:25PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 7 Mar 2001, Raul Miller wrote:
> 
> > > It looks like ~maor/dinstall/debian-keyring.gpg hasn't changed since
> > > April 2000.  Is the intent to prevent maintainers who are not around
> > > for at least a year from voting or is this a bug?
> > 
> > It's worse than that.
> 
> The cannonical location of the keyring on all debian.org machines is
> /org/kering.debian.org/

At the risk of stating the obvious typo:
/org/keyring.debian.org/


-- 
Brian Russo  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Debian/GNU Linux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.debian.org
LPSG "member"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   http://www.lpsg.org
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

[Branden Robinson]

On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 11:45:58PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 10:31:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > 
> > >  * What do you think will be the three major problems Debian will face
> > >over the next year or two?
> > 
> > * version skew between our many supported architectures hamstringing our
> >   package pools
> 
> a) Testing ensures that we can release with little or no version skew
> b) Your assertion makes it appear as if the architectures are at fault,
>when in fact 95% of the time (I have stats) build failures are due to
>the package, and not specific to an arch.

I do not see how your inference follows from my statement.

The current implementation of testing does indeed ensure that we can
release with little or no version skew, but it doesn't necessarily result
in less buggy packages.  Take the case of XFree86 4.0.2-1.  It didn't have
RC bugs, and it didn't have build errors.  It just didn't get built for all
6 architectures for well over a month.  Even then, Anthony Towns had to
force it in.  (Now, of course, the testing archive has been clobbered and
XFree86 is gone again -- this is so mortifying that my emotional continuum
has wrapped around and I have to laugh about it.)

> The other 5% can be due to toolchain issues, or just plain old oddities
> in our complex dist that requires the buildd operator to actually
> manually build the package (IOW, no bug at all, just a manual build).

It doesn't really matter what the causes are.  They all take manpower to
fix, and as we try to release for something like 10 architectures
simultaneously, we run the risk of ending up in the same boat we've always
been; testing is so far out of date that it doesn't really matter that it
wasn't that way because we were frozen for 9 months.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson | If a man ate a pound of pasta and a
Debian GNU/Linux| pound of antipasto, would they cancel
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  | out, leaving him still hungry?
http://www.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Scott Adams

 PGP signature

Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

[Branden Robinson]

On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 11:03:48PM -0600, Sam TH wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 10:31:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > mpg123MPEG layer 1/2/3 audio player
> > 
> > This has a hand-rolled license.  Is there a freely-licensed MP3
> > player available?  I am aware of the patent issues but view them
> > with scorn.
> 
> Try mpg321, now in unstable.  It doesn't do everything that mpg123
> does, but they are working on it.  

This is probably off-topic for -vote, but what the hell.  Educate your
candidates.

What specifically does mpg321 not do?  All I really need it to do is play
back the file from start to finish, and accept any valid file in the
format.

> First, those aren't the specs.  The specs are all available at the W3C
> website, under the license described here:

Thanks for the clarfication.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson |   Somewhere, there is a .sig so funny that
Debian GNU/Linux|   reading it will cause an aneurysm.  This
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  |   is not that .sig.
http://www.debian.org/~branden/ |

 PGP signature

Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

[Branden Robinson]

On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 07:39:29PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 10:31:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > * Fish or cut bait with respect to non-free, and pass any constitutional
> >   amendments necessary to permit us to make that choice;
> 
> this seems a bit more definite than your previous statements on this
> topic.
> 
> do you intend to take any action to have non-free removed from the
> debian archives? (this is a yes or no question, but feel free to make
> comments after answering yes or no).

Peter Makholm has sussed out what I meant by this.  I just want to see
resolution of the issue via a democratic process.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson |   When I die I want to go peacefully in
Debian GNU/Linux|   my sleep like my ol' Grand Dad...not
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  |   screaming in terror like his passengers.
http://www.debian.org/~branden/ |

 PGP signature

Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

[Sam TH]

On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 12:27:03AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 11:03:48PM -0600, Sam TH wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 10:31:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > mpg123MPEG layer 1/2/3 audio player
> > > 
> > >   This has a hand-rolled license.  Is there a freely-licensed MP3
> > >   player available?  I am aware of the patent issues but view them
> > >   with scorn.
> > 
> > Try mpg321, now in unstable.  It doesn't do everything that mpg123
> > does, but they are working on it.  
> 
> This is probably off-topic for -vote, but what the hell.  Educate your
> candidates.
> 
> What specifically does mpg321 not do?  All I really need it to do is play
> back the file from start to finish, and accept any valid file in the
> format.

Well, it does that.  It doesn't support lists, or shuffle, or
complicated things like http proxies or downsampling.  For slightly
more info, see the PROBLEMS file in /usr/doc/mpg321/.  Note that that
is the extent of my knowledge on the subject.  

   
sam th --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- http://www.abisource.com/~sam/
OpenPGP Key: CABD33FC --- http://samth.dyndns.org/key
DeCSS: http://samth.dynds.org/decss


 PGP signature

Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

[Ben Collins]

On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 12:24:29AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 11:45:58PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 10:31:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > 
> > > >  * What do you think will be the three major problems Debian will face
> > > >over the next year or two?
> > > 
> > > * version skew between our many supported architectures hamstringing our
> > >   package pools
> > 
> > a) Testing ensures that we can release with little or no version skew
> > b) Your assertion makes it appear as if the architectures are at fault,
> >when in fact 95% of the time (I have stats) build failures are due to
> >the package, and not specific to an arch.
> 
> I do not see how your inference follows from my statement.
> 
> The current implementation of testing does indeed ensure that we can
> release with little or no version skew, but it doesn't necessarily result
> in less buggy packages.  Take the case of XFree86 4.0.2-1.  It didn't have
> RC bugs, and it didn't have build errors.  It just didn't get built for all
> 6 architectures for well over a month.  Even then, Anthony Towns had to
> force it in.  (Now, of course, the testing archive has been clobbered and
> XFree86 is gone again -- this is so mortifying that my emotional continuum
> has wrapped around and I have to laugh about it.)

Releasing is the point, and I do believe that testing will create a more
up-to-date release than we have had in the recent past. Just because X
(one of the largest builds for the buildd's) had issues, doesn't make it so
for all other packages.

> > The other 5% can be due to toolchain issues, or just plain old oddities
> > in our complex dist that requires the buildd operator to actually
> > manually build the package (IOW, no bug at all, just a manual build).
> 
> It doesn't really matter what the causes are.  They all take manpower to
> fix, and as we try to release for something like 10 architectures
> simultaneously, we run the risk of ending up in the same boat we've always
> been; testing is so far out of date that it doesn't really matter that it
> wasn't that way because we were frozen for 9 months.

Of course it matters what the causes are. It is a direct relation to
solving it. Fix the bugs in the packages causing them to fail to build,
and we have less issues. This is a maintainer issue, not a port issue.
We would have this problem even with only 2 architectures.

Actually the more archs we have building packages, the more likely we
are to see bug reports for common build errors, and the better the
packages will be (assuming the bugs get fixed).

This isn't one of those problems you can throw people at and hope it
gets fixed by shear will power or determination. It is something that
needs attention on a singular basis of each maintainer for their
package(s).

Over the last few weeks I filed almost 100 bug reports for failed
builds. These are RC bugs. They were not sparc specific bugs, and
generally they were as simple as fixing build-deps, or minor thinko's in
the debian/rules (one-liners). Right now, 76 of those bugs are still
open, and the packages are still listed as "failed" on my build server,
and will remain so until they get fixed.

-- 
 ---===-=-==-=---==-=--
/  Ben Collins  --  ...on that fantastic voyage...  --  Debian GNU/Linux   \
`  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  --  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  --  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  '
 `---=--===-=-=-=-===-==---=--=---'


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

[Sam Hartman]

> "Ben" == Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

Ben> On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 12:24:29AM -0500, Branden Robinson
Ben> wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 11:45:58PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote: >
>> On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 10:31:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson
>> wrote: > > > > > * What do you think will be the three major
>> problems Debian will face > > > over the next year or two?  > >
>> > > * version skew between our many supported architectures
>> hamstringing our > > package pools > > a) Testing ensures that
>> we can release with little or no version skew > b) Your
>> assertion makes it appear as if the architectures are at fault,
>> > when in fact 95% of the time (I have stats) build failures
>> are due to > the package, and not specific to an arch.
>> 
>> I do not see how your inference follows from my statement.
>> 
>> The current implementation of testing does indeed ensure that
>> we can release with little or no version skew, but it doesn't
>> necessarily result in less buggy packages.  Take the case of
>> XFree86 4.0.2-1.  It didn't have RC bugs, and it didn't have
>> build errors.  It just didn't get built for all 6 architectures
>> for well over a month.  Even then, Anthony Towns had to force
>> it in.  (Now, of course, the testing archive has been clobbered
>> and XFree86 is gone again -- this is so mortifying that my
>> emotional continuum has wrapped around and I have to laugh
>> about it.)

Ben> Releasing is the point, and I do believe that testing will
Ben> create a more up-to-date release than we have had in the
Ben> recent past. Just because X (one of the largest builds for
Ben> the buildd's) had issues, doesn't make it so for all other
Ben> packages.

But when X fails to install into testing it really does hurt the
release; many packages in Debian depend on X.  When X, Perl (and thus
debconf) , etc failed to go into testing, it did cause a significant
delay.

Yes, there are many maintainer problems, but there are also
port/release problems.  The m68k buildd was using a broken mirror
apparently from some time in Decemeber until February 8 and even
though questions were asked on debian-devel and debian-68k, the
response took a long time.

We can't just focus on the port/release problems, and we can't just focus on the 
maintainer issues; we need to solve both.



>> > The other 5% can be due to toolchain issues, or just plain
>> old oddities > in our complex dist that requires the buildd
>> operator to actually > manually build the package (IOW, no bug
>> at all, just a manual build).
>> 
>> It doesn't really matter what the causes are.  They all take
>> manpower to fix, and as we try to release for something like 10
>> architectures simultaneously, we run the risk of ending up in
>> the same boat we've always been; testing is so far out of date
>> that it doesn't really matter that it wasn't that way because
>> we were frozen for 9 months.

Ben> Of course it matters what the causes are. It is a direct
Ben> relation to solving it. 

I think what Branden was trying to say is that the importance of the
problem is independent of the cause, but dependent only on the result.
I think he has identified a valid concern--packages lots of stuff
depends on not getting into testing quickly, and you have identified a
different problem--maintainers not fixing their packages.


It seems reasonable for a DPL candidate to say they are going to try
to fix both of these.



--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

[Anthony Towns]

On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 02:46:39AM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
> But when X fails to install into testing it really does hurt the
> release; many packages in Debian depend on X.  When X, Perl (and thus
> debconf) , etc failed to go into testing, it did cause a significant
> delay.

And glibc2.2, and gcc, and alsa, gtk, and gnome, and libqt2.2, and
whatever other things I haven't noticed yet.

> Yes, there are many maintainer problems, but there are also
> port/release problems.

For example glibc and gcc had some problems getting ported to arm for a
fair while; X had problems (and still does) working on m68k (in particular
xserver-xfree86); alsa needs some bugs fixed; libqt2.2 wasn't building
on alpha without a newer version of gcc.

I'm not sure it's really reasonable to try to blame either the maintainer
or the porter for these sorts of problems. The reason for the hold up
is generally the upstream source breaking on one of the architectures,
if you're really desperate for someone to blame. I'm not sure it's really
reasonable to try to expect either the maintainer or the porter to try to
fix it alone.

> The m68k buildd was using a broken mirror
> apparently from some time in Decemeber until February 8 and even
> though questions were asked on debian-devel and debian-68k, the
> response took a long time.

Current stats (as far as testing is concerned) are something like:

 47 ( 1%) i386
 60 ( 1%) alpha
229 ( 5%) sparc
298 ( 7%) arm
422 (10%) powerpc
423 (10%) m68k

Percentages as a total of the 4345 source packages currently in unstable;
which isn't particularly meaningful, but should be indicative.

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you
  do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.''
  -- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)

 PGP signature

[BALLOT] Leader Election 2001

[Acting Debian Project Secretary]

[If you've sent in a ballot before this point, you'll have
received a number of bogus acknowledgements.  Ignore them.
I expect that any such vote will be recorded properly, but
please re-submit your vote just to be safe.]

   CALL FOR VOTES

Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC Mar 28, 2001

This vote is being conducted as required by the Debian Constitution.  For
voting questions only contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]  

HOW TO VOTE

Do not erase anything between the lines below and do not change the
choice names.


In the brackets next to your preferred choice, place a 1. Place
a 2 in the brackets next to your next choice. Continue till
you reach your last choice. You may leave choices you consider
unacceptable blank. Start with 1, don't skip any numbers, don't
repeat. To vote "no, no matter what" do not leave an option
black but rank "None Of The Above" higher than the unacceptable
choices.

Then mail the ballot to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Just
Replying to this message should work, but check the "To:" line.
Don't worry about spacing of the columns or any quote characters
(">") that your reply inserts. NOTE: The vote must be GPG signed
(or PGP signed) with your key that is in the debian keyring

-=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
[   ] Choice 1: Branden Robinson
[   ] Choice 2: Anand Kumria
[   ] Choice 3: Ben Collins
[   ] Choice 4: Bdale Garbee
[   ] Choice 5: None Of The Above

-=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

- Raul Miller
  (Acting Debian Project Secretary)


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

[Craig Sanders]

On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 10:31:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 02:10:22PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> >  * What do you think are the three big things Debian should achieve
> >over the next twelve months?
> 
> In no particular order:
> 
> * Fish or cut bait with respect to non-free, and pass any constitutional
>   amendments necessary to permit us to make that choice;

this seems a bit more definite than your previous statements on this
topic.

do you intend to take any action to have non-free removed from the
debian archives? (this is a yes or no question, but feel free to make
comments after answering yes or no).

craig


--
craig sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

  GnuPG Key: 1024D/CD5626F0 
Key fingerprint: 9674 7EE2 4AC6 F5EF 3C57  52C3 EC32 6810 CD56 26F0

Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

[Peter Makholm]

Craig Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> > * Fish or cut bait with respect to non-free, and pass any constitutional
> >   amendments necessary to permit us to make that choice;
> 
> this seems a bit more definite than your previous statements on this
> topic.

Well. Do you want a project leader who doesn't care about the out-come
of an general resoulution?

I see the above as a statement that we should get the problem settled
and then move on. Whatever Branden thinks is the _right_ solution is
irrelevant for the question if he thinks that _a_ solution must be
found in the next year.

(I hope no matter whom gets to be the next project leader and what the
out-come of a generel resolution is, that we could stop discussiong it
at least for the next couple of releases. But that's probally another
discussion) 

-- 
Free beer får det bedste frem i en pingvin.
http://peter.makholm.net/beer/

Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

[Sven LUTHER]

On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 10:31:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> html2latexConvert HTML markup to LaTeX markup
> 
>   Hrm, I don't actually use this.  I should probably remove it.  The
>   license is quite definitely non-free.  Can someone suggest
>   alternatives?  We could also attempt contacting the author, Nathan
>   Torkington.  It was copyrighted 7 years ago, and the profile of
>   free licensing has risen considerably since then.

Well, you could try out hevea, it is in main (at least in unstable) and should
do what you like :

 Package: hevea
 Version: 1.05-4+png
 Section: tex
 Priority: optional
 Architecture: i386
 Depends: libc6 (>= 2.2.1-2), libncurses5, gs, netpbm, tetex-bin, dvips
 Suggests: netpbm-nonfree
 Installed-Size: 1268
 Maintainer: Ralf Treinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 Description: A fast and powerful LaTeX to HTML translator
  HeVeA is a LaTeX to HTML translator. Its remarkable features are
   - It produces good output. By default (can be turned off) it uses the
 symbol face for math symbols. Either way it usually avoids generating
 zillions of picture files.
   - It is highly configurable through (La)TeX macros. Though aimed at
 LaTeX input it understands a fair subset of TeX' macro language.
   - It runs fast.
  This version of HeVeA is patched to generate by default PNG picture
  files instead of GIF.
  .
  See also http://para.inria.fr/~maranget/hevea/index.html.

Friendly,

Sven Luther

Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

[Adrian Bunk]

On Wed, 7 Mar 2001, Sven LUTHER wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 10:31:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > html2latexConvert HTML markup to LaTeX markup
> >
> > Hrm, I don't actually use this.  I should probably remove it.  The
> > license is quite definitely non-free.  Can someone suggest
> > alternatives?  We could also attempt contacting the author, Nathan
> > Torkington.  It was copyrighted 7 years ago, and the profile of
> > free licensing has risen considerably since then.
>
> Well, you could try out hevea, it is in main (at least in unstable) and should
> do what you like :
>
>  Package: hevea
>...
>  Description: A fast and powerful LaTeX to HTML translator
>...


hevea is exactly the opposite (LaTeX -> HTML) of html2latex ...


> Friendly,
>
> Sven Luther

cu
Adrian

-- 

Nicht weil die Dinge schwierig sind wagen wir sie nicht,
sondern weil wir sie nicht wagen sind sie schwierig.

Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

[Seth Arnold]

* Sven LUTHER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010307 01:49]:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 10:31:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > html2latexConvert HTML markup to LaTeX markup
[...]
>  Package: hevea
[...]
>  Description: A fast and powerful LaTeX to HTML translator
[...]

Nice thought but wrong direction.

-- 
Earthlink: The #1 provider of unsolicited bulk email to the Internet.

[PRE-BALLOT] Leader Election 2001

[Acting Debian Project Secretary]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

This is a test ballot.  If it works for you, great, but my preliminary
tests indicate that there are likely to be problems.  Please save a
copy of your ballot so that you can re-submit it in the event of mail
system problems.

 PRE-CALL FOR VOTES

Votes must be received by 23:59:59 UTC Mar 28, 2001

This vote is being conducted as required by the Debian Constitution.  For
voting questions only contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]  

HOW TO VOTE

Do not erase anything between the lines below and do not change the
choice names.


In the brackets next to your preferred choice, place a 1. Place
a 2 in the brackets next to your next choice. Continue till
you reach your last choice. You may leave choices you consider
unacceptable blank. Start with 1, don't skip any numbers, don't
repeat. To vote "no, no matter what" do not leave an option
black but rank "Further Discussion" higher than the unacceptable
choices.

Then mail the ballot to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Just
Replying to this message should work, but check the "To:" line.
Don't worry about spacing of the columns or any quote characters
(">") that your reply inserts. NOTE: The vote must be PGP signed
with your key that is in the debian keyring

- -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
[   ] Choice 1: Branden Robinson
[   ] Choice 2: Anand Kumria
[   ] Choice 3: Ben Collins
[   ] Choice 4: Bdale Garbee
[   ] Choice 5: None Of The Above

- -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

- - Raul Miller
  (Acting Debian Project Secretary)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iQEVAwUBOqYljvK/+Baey4gJAQFbmwf/aeFjGWxV3ydznrZBnXQwHzWTau1IQrNe
fuEKNwGGjx+3rDtrSYXPDgYcdMbCgcolGa95yTzHjtpF23P6mLXLdiUb9VuzIeN+
D3Hj3Teibn1+7In8mso5mJnJJm32SOl1bLDCpPkXMcVd0eCC0p50B9Oo/DwW8rNB
C6k64KsAmXZgP6qu5bQv/DwVyVD64/USwnXM1Id5rGX2vFjxyxJ4TFCDSp6nEfPd
0ok7lN9B/1voNYAeX8YufKQQg6tDuWkKk098ncMFugW9obiMTApiMStsuehGUOxA
yLgHplYlTKRu7ZJdh8Rr8+4pi8Blll9Yy86fqktqXl9AvHZf8QdJ4A==
=4ir8
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [PRE-BALLOT] Leader Election 2001

[Hamish Moffatt]

On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 12:34:58PM -, Acting Debian Project Secretary wrote:
> In the brackets next to your preferred choice, place a 1. Place
> a 2 in the brackets next to your next choice. Continue till
> you reach your last choice. You may leave choices you consider
> unacceptable blank. Start with 1, don't skip any numbers, don't
> repeat. To vote "no, no matter what" do not leave an option
> black but rank "Further Discussion" higher than the unacceptable
> choices.
> 
>[...] 
> - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> [   ] Choice 1: Branden Robinson
> [   ] Choice 2: Anand Kumria
> [   ] Choice 3: Ben Collins
> [   ] Choice 4: Bdale Garbee
> [   ] Choice 5: None Of The Above
> 
> - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

There IS no "Further Discussion" option...


Hamish
-- 
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: [PRE-BALLOT] Leader Election 2001

[Martin Schulze]

I guess it is acceptable to use GPG instead of PGP as written in the ballot?

Regards,

Joey

-- 
GNU does not eliminate all the world's problems, only some of them.
-- The GNU Manifesto

administrivia Re: [PRE-BALLOT] Leader Election 2001

[Raul Miller]

Thanks for the corrections.

On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 12:19:22AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > repeat. To vote "no, no matter what" do not leave an option
> > black but rank "Further Discussion" higher than the unacceptable
> > choices.
...
> > [   ] Choice 5: None Of The Above
...
> There IS no "Further Discussion" option...

I'll change that to "None Of The Above" in the release ballot.

On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 02:26:27PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> I guess it is acceptable to use GPG instead of PGP as written in the ballot?

I'll make an explicit note that GPG is preferred and PGP may be used
as an alternative in the release ballot.

Thanks again,

-- 
Raul

Re: [PRE-BALLOT] Leader Election 2001

[Jason Gunthorpe]

On Wed, 7 Mar 2001, Martin Schulze wrote:

> I guess it is acceptable to use GPG instead of PGP as written in the ballot?

Unless Raul has altered the vote system..

The vote system uses my mail gateway wrapper script which is used by the
db.debian.org mail gateways and others. It accepts any mail signed by a
key that GPG can parse (so PGP2 and OpenPGP keys). Further, it requires
that the key being used is in the official keyring, and listed at
db.debian.org. It also requires that your local clock is not more than 1
week off.

It will accept any given message exactly once. It records messages it has
seen before and rejects them if sent a second time. Each person gets 1
vote, no matter how many keys they have. The vote system allows you to
recast your ballot as many times as you like, and the mailgateway enforces
a strict ordering (so an attacker cannot resend an old ballot from you)

If you are uncertain about which PGP keys you have registered, please try
finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]

And it will send them to you. I think it is probably too late for anyone
to get a new key registered, so please vote with the keys you have.

Jason

Re: ballot bounced

[Sam Hartman]

It looks like ~maor/dinstall/debian-keyring.gpg hasn't changed since
April 2000.  Is the intent to prevent maintainers who are not around
for at least a year from voting or is this a bug?



To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 03:41:18 +
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Vote Mail failed: Unable to check the signature or the signature was 
invalid:

Hello!

Your ballot to the vote system is malformed, or an internal processing
error occured. The information below may help you, or the vote
administrator to identify the problem.

Error: Unable to check the signature or the signature was invalid:
==> Message Error: Unable to verify signature, signing key missing.

Re: ballot bounced

[Raul Miller]

On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 10:51:03PM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
> It looks like ~maor/dinstall/debian-keyring.gpg hasn't changed since
> April 2000.  Is the intent to prevent maintainers who are not around
> for at least a year from voting or is this a bug?

It's worse than that.

I hope people are saving their ballots -- not a single vote has
registered in the db yet.

I'm trying to get the thing working, but I didn't write the code
originally, and it's acting up.  [It feels like there's a problem with
the qmail -> exim transition as well as the key recognition problem.]

Another note:  Darren is somewhat available, and I've been asking him
questions, but nothing has panned out from that direction.

Thanks,

-- 
Raul

Re: ballot bounced

[Jason Gunthorpe]

On Wed, 7 Mar 2001, Raul Miller wrote:

> > It looks like ~maor/dinstall/debian-keyring.gpg hasn't changed since
> > April 2000.  Is the intent to prevent maintainers who are not around
> > for at least a year from voting or is this a bug?
> 
> It's worse than that.

The cannonical location of the keyring on all debian.org machines is
/org/kering.debian.org/
 
> I'm trying to get the thing working, but I didn't write the code
> originally, and it's acting up.  [It feels like there's a problem with
> the qmail -> exim transition as well as the key recognition problem.]

I belive the system was tested after that transition.

Jason

Re: ballot bounced

[Brian Russo]

On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 09:21:25PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 7 Mar 2001, Raul Miller wrote:
> 
> > > It looks like ~maor/dinstall/debian-keyring.gpg hasn't changed since
> > > April 2000.  Is the intent to prevent maintainers who are not around
> > > for at least a year from voting or is this a bug?
> > 
> > It's worse than that.
> 
> The cannonical location of the keyring on all debian.org machines is
> /org/kering.debian.org/

At the risk of stating the obvious typo:
/org/keyring.debian.org/


-- 
Brian Russo  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Debian/GNU Linux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.debian.org
LPSG "member"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   http://www.lpsg.org
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

[Branden Robinson]

On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 11:45:58PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 10:31:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > 
> > >  * What do you think will be the three major problems Debian will face
> > >over the next year or two?
> > 
> > * version skew between our many supported architectures hamstringing our
> >   package pools
> 
> a) Testing ensures that we can release with little or no version skew
> b) Your assertion makes it appear as if the architectures are at fault,
>when in fact 95% of the time (I have stats) build failures are due to
>the package, and not specific to an arch.

I do not see how your inference follows from my statement.

The current implementation of testing does indeed ensure that we can
release with little or no version skew, but it doesn't necessarily result
in less buggy packages.  Take the case of XFree86 4.0.2-1.  It didn't have
RC bugs, and it didn't have build errors.  It just didn't get built for all
6 architectures for well over a month.  Even then, Anthony Towns had to
force it in.  (Now, of course, the testing archive has been clobbered and
XFree86 is gone again -- this is so mortifying that my emotional continuum
has wrapped around and I have to laugh about it.)

> The other 5% can be due to toolchain issues, or just plain old oddities
> in our complex dist that requires the buildd operator to actually
> manually build the package (IOW, no bug at all, just a manual build).

It doesn't really matter what the causes are.  They all take manpower to
fix, and as we try to release for something like 10 architectures
simultaneously, we run the risk of ending up in the same boat we've always
been; testing is so far out of date that it doesn't really matter that it
wasn't that way because we were frozen for 9 months.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson | If a man ate a pound of pasta and a
Debian GNU/Linux| pound of antipasto, would they cancel
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  | out, leaving him still hungry?
http://www.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Scott Adams


pgpsXwgcNErFX.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

[Branden Robinson]

On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 11:03:48PM -0600, Sam TH wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 10:31:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > mpg123MPEG layer 1/2/3 audio player
> > 
> > This has a hand-rolled license.  Is there a freely-licensed MP3
> > player available?  I am aware of the patent issues but view them
> > with scorn.
> 
> Try mpg321, now in unstable.  It doesn't do everything that mpg123
> does, but they are working on it.  

This is probably off-topic for -vote, but what the hell.  Educate your
candidates.

What specifically does mpg321 not do?  All I really need it to do is play
back the file from start to finish, and accept any valid file in the
format.

> First, those aren't the specs.  The specs are all available at the W3C
> website, under the license described here:

Thanks for the clarfication.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson |   Somewhere, there is a .sig so funny that
Debian GNU/Linux|   reading it will cause an aneurysm.  This
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  |   is not that .sig.
http://www.debian.org/~branden/ |


pgpEYEvwsrcaj.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

[Branden Robinson]

On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 07:39:29PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 10:31:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > * Fish or cut bait with respect to non-free, and pass any constitutional
> >   amendments necessary to permit us to make that choice;
> 
> this seems a bit more definite than your previous statements on this
> topic.
> 
> do you intend to take any action to have non-free removed from the
> debian archives? (this is a yes or no question, but feel free to make
> comments after answering yes or no).

Peter Makholm has sussed out what I meant by this.  I just want to see
resolution of the issue via a democratic process.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson |   When I die I want to go peacefully in
Debian GNU/Linux|   my sleep like my ol' Grand Dad...not
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  |   screaming in terror like his passengers.
http://www.debian.org/~branden/ |


pgp6I9e4BTV4Z.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

[Sam TH]

On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 12:27:03AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 11:03:48PM -0600, Sam TH wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 10:31:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > mpg123MPEG layer 1/2/3 audio player
> > > 
> > >   This has a hand-rolled license.  Is there a freely-licensed MP3
> > >   player available?  I am aware of the patent issues but view them
> > >   with scorn.
> > 
> > Try mpg321, now in unstable.  It doesn't do everything that mpg123
> > does, but they are working on it.  
> 
> This is probably off-topic for -vote, but what the hell.  Educate your
> candidates.
> 
> What specifically does mpg321 not do?  All I really need it to do is play
> back the file from start to finish, and accept any valid file in the
> format.

Well, it does that.  It doesn't support lists, or shuffle, or
complicated things like http proxies or downsampling.  For slightly
more info, see the PROBLEMS file in /usr/doc/mpg321/.  Note that that
is the extent of my knowledge on the subject.  

   
sam th --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- http://www.abisource.com/~sam/
OpenPGP Key: CABD33FC --- http://samth.dyndns.org/key
DeCSS: http://samth.dynds.org/decss



pgphnkdCwAtWa.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Some questions for the DPL candidates

[Ben Collins]

On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 12:24:29AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 11:45:58PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 10:31:00PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > 
> > > >  * What do you think will be the three major problems Debian will face
> > > >over the next year or two?
> > > 
> > > * version skew between our many supported architectures hamstringing our
> > >   package pools
> > 
> > a) Testing ensures that we can release with little or no version skew
> > b) Your assertion makes it appear as if the architectures are at fault,
> >when in fact 95% of the time (I have stats) build failures are due to
> >the package, and not specific to an arch.
> 
> I do not see how your inference follows from my statement.
> 
> The current implementation of testing does indeed ensure that we can
> release with little or no version skew, but it doesn't necessarily result
> in less buggy packages.  Take the case of XFree86 4.0.2-1.  It didn't have
> RC bugs, and it didn't have build errors.  It just didn't get built for all
> 6 architectures for well over a month.  Even then, Anthony Towns had to
> force it in.  (Now, of course, the testing archive has been clobbered and
> XFree86 is gone again -- this is so mortifying that my emotional continuum
> has wrapped around and I have to laugh about it.)

Releasing is the point, and I do believe that testing will create a more
up-to-date release than we have had in the recent past. Just because X
(one of the largest builds for the buildd's) had issues, doesn't make it so
for all other packages.

> > The other 5% can be due to toolchain issues, or just plain old oddities
> > in our complex dist that requires the buildd operator to actually
> > manually build the package (IOW, no bug at all, just a manual build).
> 
> It doesn't really matter what the causes are.  They all take manpower to
> fix, and as we try to release for something like 10 architectures
> simultaneously, we run the risk of ending up in the same boat we've always
> been; testing is so far out of date that it doesn't really matter that it
> wasn't that way because we were frozen for 9 months.

Of course it matters what the causes are. It is a direct relation to
solving it. Fix the bugs in the packages causing them to fail to build,
and we have less issues. This is a maintainer issue, not a port issue.
We would have this problem even with only 2 architectures.

Actually the more archs we have building packages, the more likely we
are to see bug reports for common build errors, and the better the
packages will be (assuming the bugs get fixed).

This isn't one of those problems you can throw people at and hope it
gets fixed by shear will power or determination. It is something that
needs attention on a singular basis of each maintainer for their
package(s).

Over the last few weeks I filed almost 100 bug reports for failed
builds. These are RC bugs. They were not sparc specific bugs, and
generally they were as simple as fixing build-deps, or minor thinko's in
the debian/rules (one-liners). Right now, 76 of those bugs are still
open, and the packages are still listed as "failed" on my build server,
and will remain so until they get fixed.

-- 
 ---===-=-==-=---==-=--
/  Ben Collins  --  ...on that fantastic voyage...  --  Debian GNU/Linux   \
`  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  --  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  --  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  '
 `---=--===-=-=-=-===-==---=--=---'