forgot to reply to all.
Forwarded Message
Subject: Re: Bug#801253: O: wicd -- wired and wireless network manager
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 12:18:34 +0100 (CET)
From: toogley
To: Gianfranco Costamagna
wicd has been picked and abandoned from upstream a lot of times
(I happen to
[PS: I thought i had sent a summarizing email to the wicd-devel which i
didn't. Therefore, i don't know what Tom van Braeckel would think about
this topic. But at least i've correctly resent that email. ]
[...] although with "inactivity" i meant rather actively developing new
features etc
Hi
>i won't adopt the maintainership for wicd, mainly because of upstream's
>inactivity. Basically, it seems that Tom van Braeckel is the only
>contributer currently, who doesn't have the time and priority to
>actively develop wicd. Therefore i don't see in wicd a future.
wicd has been picke
Hey.
i won't adopt the maintainership for wicd, mainly because of upstream's
inactivity. Basically, it seems that Tom van Braeckel is the only
contributer currently, who doesn't have the time and priority to
actively develop wicd. Therefore i don't see in wicd a future.
I'm really intereste
Hi toogley,
toogley wrote:
> i won't adopt the maintainership for wicd, mainly because of
> upstream's inactivity.
Thanks for your contributions nevertheless!
> I'm really interested in the technology, as well as debian
> packaging Hence, I'll ask in other debian teams/packages for
> contributi
Hey.
I can't reproduce #758737
(https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=758737)
According to https://bugs.launchpad.net/wicd/+bug/1232521 it was not
fixed by upstream yet.
Did i make a mistake? If no, should i message the commands below to
758737-submit...@bugs.debian.org with a me
On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 09:11:12PM +0100, Axel Beckert wrote:
> There though may be other reasons why a package is held back from
> migrating to testing, e.g. if a package it depends on or build-depends
> on, hasn't migrated to testing yet.
Just to be picky, build-dependencies are not considered f
Hi,
toogley wrote:
> On 02/01/2016 09:11 PM, Axel Beckert wrote:
> > And the uploads 1.7.3-1 and 1.7.3-2 have shown that this probably was
> > a good idea. ;-)
>
> Do you mean because of the big amount of fixed bugs?
Because quite some severe bugs were found in the first two uploads.
There were
On 02/01/2016 09:11 PM, Axel Beckert wrote:
> In general or in case of wicd as of now?
i'm interested in both, so thanks for answering it :)
On 02/01/2016 09:11 PM, Axel Beckert wrote:
> And the uploads 1.7.3-1 and 1.7.3-2 have shown that this probably was
> a good idea. ;-)
Do you mean becau
Hi,
toogley wrote:
> what exactly needs to be changed in the package to be uploaded in
> unstable?
In general or in case of wicd as of now? In general there can be many
reasons. A common one is though the one which currently applies to wicd:
I want to wait with the next upload until the current
Hey,
what exactly needs to be changed in the package to be uploaded in
unstable? Or what is the reason for waiting some time before changing
from "UNRELEASED" to "unstable" inside the debian changelog file?
On 01/26/2016 02:24 PM, Axel Beckert wrote:
Hi,
toogley wrote:
does it bother, wh
Hi,
toogley wrote:
> does it bother, when i work at the package within a delay of a week at most?
If it doesn't bother that I work on the package, too.
At least I want to fix the things I broke with the initial 1.7.3
upload. :-)
> @Axel:
>
> May i import + upload the next version of wicd (whic
additionally: is it harmful for users/debian/wicd/whatever, when i work
at a particular problem regarding the wicd package with a delay of 2,3,4
weeks?
i mean, of course i intend to work regularly(=at least every week) on
wicd, but just to be sure..^^
On 01/26/2016 01:44 PM, toogley wrote:
does it bother, when i work at the package within a delay of a week at most?
@Axel:
May i import + upload the next version of wicd (which is 1.7.5, i think)?
https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/rb-pkg/unstable/amd64/wicd.html
says, the package building has failed, because of "dpkg-source: w
https://github.com/toogley/pkg-wicd/commit/b2931ca51f831369ec2854b20b523ba9db42546a
On 01/17/2016 06:06 PM, Axel Beckert wrote:
Hi,
toogley wrote:
On 01/17/2016 04:32 PM, toogley wrote:
What do you mean by "uploaded packages" ? the upstream release (on
launchpad)?
No, I meant that no packag
why has the debian/patches dir in stretch more patches than in master,
since the master branch is merged into stretch?
On 01/17/2016 04:26 PM, Axel Beckert wrote:
Hi,
toogley wrote:
The commit ff299c3 has merged the upstream version 1.7.3 into
master, but https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/wicd
Hi,
toogley wrote:
> On 01/17/2016 04:32 PM, toogley wrote:
> >What do you mean by "uploaded packages" ? the upstream release (on
> >launchpad)?
No, I meant that no package for 1.7.3 has been uploaded to Debian
Unstable yet.
> Ah, sry. I missunderstood you. You mean it's not in unstable yet and
Ah, sry. I missunderstood you. You mean it's not in unstable yet and
therefore it complains.
On 01/17/2016 04:32 PM, toogley wrote:
What do you mean by "uploaded packages" ? the upstream release (on
launchpad)?
On 01/17/2016 04:26 PM, Axel Beckert wrote:
Hi,
toogley wrote:
The commit ff299c
What do you mean by "uploaded packages" ? the upstream release (on
launchpad)?
On 01/17/2016 04:26 PM, Axel Beckert wrote:
Hi,
toogley wrote:
The commit ff299c3 has merged the upstream version 1.7.3 into
master, but https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/wicd says, we still need
to merge it in. What
Hey,
The commit ff299c3 has merged the upstream version 1.7.3 into master,
but https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/wicd says, we still need to merge it
in. What is wrong here? Do i missunderstand sth?
Hi,
toogley wrote:
> The commit ff299c3 has merged the upstream version 1.7.3 into
> master, but https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/wicd says, we still need
> to merge it in. What is wrong here? Do i missunderstand sth?
https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/wicd as well as the predecessor
https://packages.q
Hey,
thanks. Additionally, i've found https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/wicd
which is fairly useful.
On 01/17/2016 02:40 AM, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
Hi,
generally speaking, what can i do in maintaining the wicd package, exept
fixing bugs (e.g. also the todo bug listed in the changelog) an
Hi,
>generally speaking, what can i do in maintaining the wicd package, exept
>fixing bugs (e.g. also the todo bug listed in the changelog) and
>uploading new upstream versions?
fixing bugs and keeping the package up-to-date, is so far the best
thing you can do with the package (as maintainer)
Hey,
generally speaking, what can i do in maintaining the wicd package, exept
fixing bugs (e.g. also the todo bug listed in the changelog) and
uploading new upstream versions?
Not sure. The translators seem active:
https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~wicd-devel/wicd/experimental/changes/954?start_revid=954
There seems no code change since March anymore. But that's less than a
year ago, so it's hard to say.
well, i have to admit i haven't checked the activity before applyin
sorry. i don't understand this point: You say, i should correct my
changelog.
Not really. It was primarily meant as advice for the next time. :-)
You can fix it if you want, though, but you don't need to. (I should
have been more explicit in this regard...)
I did understand it as an advice/fri
Hi
>Can you please explain why you used dh_clean and not dh_build or sth
>similar? i mean, is there a specific reason?
acually the updatepo is something that needs to be done and committed on git.
during in dh-clean ensures you will run it from time to time (at least to create
a source.change
Hi again,
toogley wrote:
> On 01/15/2016 10:36 PM, Axel Beckert wrote:
> >Only one small thing to nitpick: Usually the changelog items are added
> >at the bottom of the current entry. They may be grouped by
> >contributor, though, i.e. adding new items at the end of your item
> >group as you did h
On 01/15/2016 10:36 PM, Axel Beckert wrote:
Only one small thing to nitpick: Usually the changelog items are added
at the bottom of the current entry. They may be grouped by
contributor, though, i.e. adding new items at the end of your item
group as you did here:
>https://github.com/toogley/pkg
Hi,
toogley wrote:
> running "git buildpackage --git-debian-branch=master" in the branch
> master results in "gbp:error: upstream/1.7.3 is not a valid treeish"
> which doesn't make sense to me, as we obviously have a debian dir in
> the master branch. (I'm refering to
> http://unix.stackexchange.c
On 01/15/2016 08:21 PM, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
(look e.g. to virtualbox-ext-package source package, where I run
debconf-updatepo in clean target, just to
avoid such situations :) )
What file/commit/whatever are you referring to? I couldn't found sth
related in your git logs.
I mean add
Hi
>But i haven't commited in the source directory, just in the debian one?
true!
cheers,
G.
On 01/15/2016 08:00 PM, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
The main issue is when you commit something in the source directory, then the
orig tarball doesn't have the same source anymore, and you have
dpkg-buildpackage
fail because of modified source.
But i haven't commited in the source directory
> orig tarball doesn't have the same source anymore,
Could you please explain that?
the source tree has the same content has the orig.tar.gz tarball.
if you commit a change outside the debian directory), the content changes
simple as this.
So, you can commit only changes in debian directories
On 01/15/2016 06:20 PM, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
(look e.g. to virtualbox-ext-package source package, where I run
debconf-updatepo in clean target, just to
avoid such situations :) )
What file/commit/whatever are you referring to? I couldn't found sth
related in your git logs.
On 01/15/2016 08:00 PM, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
orig tarball doesn't have the same source anymore,
Could you please explain that?
Hi,
>oh, i've just overlooked that part of your explanation regarding the
>master/sid branch...
lol wonderful!
> What do you mean by that? I mean, if i revert/correct my changes with
> another commit, doesn't that lead to a confusing git history, as my
> commit was not correct?
everybody do
oh, i've just overlooked that part of your explanation regarding the
master/sid branch...
On 01/15/2016 07:33 PM, toogley wrote:
Hi Gianfranco, Hi Axel,
So, the master branch represents sid in the wicd repo?
sry for the missunderstanding^^
> since you changed something in debian directory
Hi Gianfranco, Hi Axel,
So, the master branch represents sid in the wicd repo?
sry for the missunderstanding^^
> since you changed something in debian directory, you can just commit
> and live happy.
What do you mean by that? I mean, if i revert/correct my changes with
another commit, doe
Hi,
>my first commit:
>https://github.com/toogley/pkg-wicd/commit/4ade5ad71c1c50be9cd3748742042ff34a428fb1
>why do you say the "main development" is done in master, and not in
>stretch, as stretch is merged into stable after a while?
no, master is usually what is uploaded in unstable.
After so
Hi Toogley,
toogley wrote:
> my first commit:
> https://github.com/toogley/pkg-wicd/commit/4ade5ad71c1c50be9cd3748742042ff34a428fb1
Yay.
It though shows that some things are not yet clear. Let me try to
explain them:
All files under debian/patches/ (except "series") are for patching
upstream co
Hey,
my first commit:
https://github.com/toogley/pkg-wicd/commit/4ade5ad71c1c50be9cd3748742042ff34a428fb1
==> Can you give me feedback, please? :)
why do you say the "main development" is done in master, and not in
stretch, as stretch is merged into stable after a while?
==> we would then me
I don't mind - the rest of your email, i'll answer in the next days.
again, thank you :)
On 01/09/2016 03:57 PM, Axel Beckert wrote:
P.S. to Toogley: I might do a short-term QA upload of 1.7.3 to Debian
Unstable with what is currently in the master branch if the TODO in
debian/changelog has so
Hi,
short note to all those people in the Cc: On the next iteration, I'll
drop all Cc except debian-mentors@lists.debian.org and the bug-report
itself. Feel free to object, to subscribe to the bug report or to
debian-mentors. :-)
toogley wrote:
> - my github repo contains all branches the debian
Hey,
- my github repo contains all branches the debian git repo has.
- when i build from the stable branch, files cointaining the name
"squeeze" are created - so i guess, it's a squeeze build.
But https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=wicd shows different
versions of wicd also for debian
+++ toogley [2016-01-07 19:49 +0100]:
> Hey,
>
> honestly thanks a lot for the friendly support. Especially Axel, thanks for
> offer to sponsor me. I hope, I won't disappoint you.
I'm happy to help too. I use wicd all the time so want to see it in
good shape. I can help with testing, packaging ad
Hi,
toogley wrote:
> Additionally I've set up the github repo
> https://github.com/toogley/pkg-wicd - but i didn't make any changes
> yet.
You should also push at least the "upstream" and preferably also the
"pristine-tar" branch to your repo. At least these are the three
branches which the git-b
Hi Gianfranco,
Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
> >The main reason why I haven't uploaded it as QA upload already is that
> >wicd-curses is slightly broken since 1.7.3. This likely requires
> >patching upstream code to get it fixed. See the TODO at
> >http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/collab-maint/wicd.g
Hi,
Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
> being a new maintainer doesn't stop you from trying to adopt a
> package, specially because you need a sponsor to see your changes
> propagated, so don't worry, somebody will double check your work!
I also would be happy if wicd would be back in shape in Debian,
Hi,
>I'd like to maintain the wicd package, especially because it's a kind of
>popular package. That would offer me a great challenge to master. But i
>assume, I'll certainly make errors and certainly be very slow at the
>beginning in comparison with an experienced maintainer.
>
>I can't estima
Hello,
I'd like to maintain the wicd package, especially because it's a kind of
popular package. That would offer me a great challenge to master. But i
assume, I'll certainly make errors and certainly be very slow at the
beginning in comparison with an experienced maintainer.
I can't estimat
51 matches
Mail list logo
