On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 05:55:18PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Peter Samuelson writes ("Re: Uploading to multiple distros"):
> > Since syncs from Debian are actually supposed to be the majority of
> > packages in Ubuntu anyway, why not just do that - a real sync, not a
Matt Zimmerman writes ("Re: Uploading to multiple distros"):
> On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 01:54:37PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > And if the package is not accepted into the Debian archive for any reason,
> > the changelog is very misleading because it looks like a sync fr
Peter Samuelson writes ("Re: Uploading to multiple distros"):
> Since syncs from Debian are actually supposed to be the majority of
> packages in Ubuntu anyway, why not just do that - a real sync, not a
> fake simultaneous one. [...]
Because that means that the Ubuntu develope
On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 06:17:09PM -0700, Evan Broder wrote:
> Hmm...a lot of this discussion seems to be getting caught up in the
> ubuntu-devel moderation queue, but I'll try to guess context as best
> as I can...
The moderation queue doesn't have any outstanding messages for this thread,
though
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 6:05 PM, Robert Collins
wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 2:40 AM, Martin Owens wrote:
>> Why not just make ppa uploading simpler at the same time? (if you can
>> change the changelog file processing):
>>
>> picocom (1.4-1) debian:unstable oneiric natty maverick lucid;
>> urg
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 2:40 AM, Martin Owens wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-06-02 at 13:20 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> For this to work I think the "suite" target in the changelog entry
>> should be qualified by the distro, so you could say (picking a random
>> example):
>>
>> picocom (1.4-1) debian:uns
On 3 June 2011 01:02, Cristian Henzel wrote:
> For the changelog part, I thought *not* requiring a specific suite would
> also be
> a good compromise.
Why do we even bother putting the suite into the changelog? I don't see the
point myself.
I believe it is the DISTRIBUTION header in the change
>
>
> I handle this using a set of scripts in Ubuntu's bikeshed package:
> * http://manpg.es/release-build
> * http://manpg.es/release
+1! I have been using these scripts extensively to do my releases, and
preparing the packages to upload them into the archive or
PPA's. Specifically for TestDri
On Jun 02, 2011, at 10:28 AM, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>Since syncs from Debian are actually supposed to be the majority of
>packages in Ubuntu anyway, why not just do that - a real sync, not a
>fake simultaneous one. I don't live in the Ubuntu dev universe, but
>given how common of an operation th
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Ian Jackson
wrote:
...
> One thing I have done a few times is to upload the very same package
> simultaneously to (say) Debian and Ubuntu.
>
> Where the package wants to be identical, and the person doing the
> upload is the same, it would be nice if this could be m
On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 01:54:37PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Iain Lane writes ("Re: Uploading to multiple distros"):
> > For "normal" syncs we generally advise not using syncpackage, but it
> > might make sense when doing simultaneous uploads.
>
> Hrm.
On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 01:54:37PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
[...]
Hrm. So syncpackage generates a .changes for uploading to ubuntu from
the .dsc (which presumably came out of the Debian build). That does
mean though that the Ubuntu target suite is not visible in the
changelog of the ultimate U
On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 03:19:14PM +0200, Stefano Rivera wrote:
> Hi Ian (2011.06.02_14:54:37_+0200)
> > I wasn't aware of syncpackage. The manpage is quite discouraging.
> It's discouraging for a reason, the Ubuntu archive admins would prefer
> that we sync packages through them if possible (whi
[Ian Jackson]
> Hrm. So syncpackage generates a .changes for uploading to ubuntu from
> the .dsc (which presumably came out of the Debian build). That does
> mean though that the Ubuntu target suite is not visible in the
> changelog of the ultimate Ubuntu package. And if the package is not
> ac
I had this very same discussion with another packager and we came to the same
conclusion: changing stuff around a bit to make uploading to multiple
distributions easier, would greatly help packagers IMO.
One thing I would welcome, if possible, would be conditional build-deps, so that
you can set d
On Thu, 2011-06-02 at 13:20 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> For this to work I think the "suite" target in the changelog entry
> should be qualified by the distro, so you could say (picking a random
> example):
>
> picocom (1.4-1) debian:unstable ubuntu:oneiric; urgency=low
>
> * new upstream v
On 02/06/11 23:19, Stefano Rivera wrote:
> [snip]
>> One way to enable simultaneous uploads would be to arrange for
>> dpkg-genchanges to filter out suites for "other" distros when
>> generating the .changes file. Then you would have the same files
>> being uploaded but two different .changes file
Hi Ian (2011.06.02_14:54:37_+0200)
> I wasn't aware of syncpackage. The manpage is quite discouraging.
It's discouraging for a reason, the Ubuntu archive admins would prefer
that we sync packages through them if possible (which results in ~1 days
wait). An API method for syncing (+ a button on la
Iain Lane writes ("Re: Uploading to multiple distros"):
> You can do this already by using syncpackage(1) from ubuntu-dev-tools ?
> I don't think the archive software looks at the changelog, but the
> distribution in the changes file.
I wasn't aware of syncp
On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 01:20:08PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
Didier Raboud writes ("Re: Color Management in Debian"):
Given that Debian is currently not frozen (and that the Oneiric
release will very probably happen before Wheezy's), I really think
that not uploading those packages to Debian fir
20 matches
Mail list logo
