This could be a very nice and elegant solution, utilising the Guest role. I
second this. Debate about using these roles (albeit different roles) took place
here also: https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2024/12/msg00031.html
>
> I have no strong opinion on this but in other teams I've set ina
Hi all,
Indeed, the way you've shown to organize rules sounds good too, thanks
for providing the information; it might prove useful in very long and
hard to follow rules for different packages.
Thanks Peter for the upload !
Have a great day,
Alexandru
signature.asc
Description: This is a digital
Hello again,
Did all the little final housework you suggested, including bonus (nice
catch !)
Ready for upload when you can !
Have a wonderful weekend,
Alexandru Mihail
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Have a great one,
Alexandru Mihail
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Hi!
Pinging about (upload) my last mail, I cleaned up upstream mess on
psrecord now and I think it's ready for upload. Would really appreciate
your scrutiny one last time.
Thanks,
Alexandru
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Hi again Peter,
Sorry for the fuss here, and thanks for the gbp reminder. I've packaged
stuff here before, admittedly never with gbp directly.
I had upstream and upstream/1.4 tag in perfect order locally but my ISP
decided to go kaputt during my git push and I was careless not to check
if it actu
Hi again,
Thanks for the help Peter !
Yes, there were some rogue commits in [upstream], I reimported upstream
tar.gz and redone the whole process, it seems to build fine for me now
in an empty sbuild.
Seems fine now, thanks for the time; upload when you think OK.
Have a great day,
Alexandru
si
tructures, not salsa.
Perhaps we keep the Guest role for some later use ? However, I don't
see much logic behind keeping Reporter,Developer here.
Suggestions are very much welcomed !
Have a good one,
Alexandru Mihail
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
ython-team/packages/psrecord
Take a look if you have the time.
Have a great day,
Alexandru Mihail
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
>
>
> > b) The "Provides" field should be removed (cf. [3]).
> As per other discussions in this tread, src package is called
> psrecord
> but I chose to call binary package python3-psrecord, thus requiring
> Provides: for apt.
I changed my mind. I accept your suggestions, I made psrecord the
bin
an upload from anyone who has the time to do so.
>
>
>
(BTW, I'm stuck with the main [default] branch on the psrecord repo, I
still can't figure out how to unprotect it and delete ( I think someone
with admin powers has to do that, it's been discussed here before )
Thanks for taking the time to help with this,
Alexandru Mihail
> Best regards,
>
> Peter
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
First, thank you all for the insightful replies !
> - psrecord as source package name
> - python3-psrecord as binary package name (shipping executable and module)
>
>
> Is choosing psrecord as source package name still advisable in the above
> cases? Or is python-psrecord as source package name
>
> I cannot help with this part. But in view of the open discussion
> about
> the package name, it might be prudent to wait until this issue has
> been
> settled.
Yes, sure.
>
> If you have questions concerning anything mentioned above, do not
> hesitate to ask.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Peter
Have a great day and thanks for the help,
Alexandru Mihail
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
ease nuke
https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/psrecord as this was
migrated to the new location following discussions about naming
conventions. it's empty.
Have a great one,
Alexandru Mihail
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Hi,
Apologies Carsten, I was not yet subscribed to debian-python and
literally missed your big mail when I was not CC'ed.
> $ gbp import-orig --verbose --sign-tags ~/Downloads/psrecord-
1.4.tar.gz
This is exactly what I ended up doing now, with a gbp.conf, the right
way.
> For now I suggest to d
> The structure of the tree is simply wrong, given you are at the beginning I
> suggest to drop the current tree and restart from scratch within your
> namespace.
> For me it makes no sense to work further on that base. It make things
> unnecessary harder.
>
> Once it's working on your side i
-tar and maybe I don't have to do all of that again.
Thanks !
A penny for your thoughts,
Alexandru Mihail
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Hey,
I would like to join the debian-python packaging team.
I am already the package maintainer for
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/mini-httpd and have also been
contributing to the wiki for some years:
https://wiki.debian.org/AlexandruMihail
Why you want to join the team: e.g. maintain your cur
18 matches
Mail list logo
