On Oct 22, 2015, at 09:09 AM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>Yeah :( That makes another point that was missed in the evaluation of
>git-dpm vs git-buildpackage and its "gpb pq" command.
When we started down this road, `gbp pq` was pretty unusable and git-dpm was
much better (IMHO, others who did provide
Sandro Tosi writes:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:01 PM, Brian May wrote:
>> Maybe we should fix #801666 first and then revisit this question?
>
> git-dpm hasnt seen a single line changed since more than a year
> (http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/git-dpm/git-dpm.git/) so I wont hold
> my breath on
you guys had plenty of time to propose something else, you stil have,
it's easy: just do the work which was done for git-dpm migration
If you just want to whine, then SHUT UP or go fix git-dpm or
pristine-tar instead!
It's not democracy, it's DOocracy so spend your time on
reporting bugs or provi
Le mercredi 21 oct. 2015 à 23:28:47 (+0100), Sandro Tosi a écrit :
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:01 PM, Brian May wrote:
> > Maybe we should fix #801666 first and then revisit this question?
>
> git-dpm hasnt seen a single line changed since more than a year
> (http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/git-d
On Wed, 21 Oct 2015, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:01 PM, Brian May wrote:
> > Maybe we should fix #801666 first and then revisit this question?
>
> git-dpm hasnt seen a single line changed since more than a year
> (http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/git-dpm/git-dpm.git/) so I wont
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:01 PM, Brian May wrote:
> Maybe we should fix #801666 first and then revisit this question?
git-dpm hasnt seen a single line changed since more than a year
(http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/git-dpm/git-dpm.git/) so I wont hold
my breath on it :(
--
Sandro Tosi (aka morp
Sandro Tosi writes:
> I dont know if this integrates easily with git-dpm though (from a very
> high level, it seems they have some incompatibilities in particular on
> how git-dpm keep tracks of the upstream source)
Maybe we should fix #801666 first and then revisit this question?
--
Brian May
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Oct 21, 2015, at 08:36 AM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>
>>I need to backport quite some packages, and use often experimental to
>>stage big packages new releases (think of numpy and matplotlib) so it
>>is not a rare situation at all and it should b
On Oct 21, 2015, at 08:36 AM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>I need to backport quite some packages, and use often experimental to
>stage big packages new releases (think of numpy and matplotlib) so it
>is not a rare situation at all and it should be considered now that we
>are at the beginning of a new era
On Tue, 20 Oct 2015, Brian May wrote:
> Barry Warsaw writes:
>
> > Now, in practice, it doesn't matter if you ignore git-dpm and just use quilt
> > *as long as the final state of the repo is compatible with git-dpm*.
> > Meaning,
> > in general, you can make whatever local decisions you want as
> It does seem like DEP-14 has thought of these complications. My concern is
> that these should be rare so it seems nicer to optimize for the common
> (simple) case and allow for the more complicated branch names when needed.
I need to backport quite some packages, and use often experimental to
On Oct 20, 2015, at 08:30 AM, Brian May wrote:
>I suspect some packages may end up needing DEP-14 names for security
>fixes and backports.
Possibly so.
>The problem here is with the naming of the upstream branches is
>different. Although security updates and backports are unlikely to use
>new up
Barry Warsaw writes:
> Now, in practice, it doesn't matter if you ignore git-dpm and just use quilt
> *as long as the final state of the repo is compatible with git-dpm*. Meaning,
> in general, you can make whatever local decisions you want as long as they
> don't force other team members to go
Barry Warsaw writes:
> My personal opinion is that we should live with the current git workflow
> recommendations for a while and see how it goes. If there are things we can
> improve on (e.g. DEP-14 compatibility) then sure, let's discuss the pros and
> cons, but let's not change things right n
On Oct 18, 2015, at 07:19 PM, Jean-Michel Vourgère wrote:
>Git multiple remotes is a nice feature. We can plug right into upstream
>tree.
Currently, our git workflow is tarball-based, since we primarily package PyPI
releases, which are tarball-centric, and because orig.tar is required for
uploads
[Jean-Michel Vourgère, 2015-10-18]
> You labelled the wiki as "official" and use terms like "must". I dislike
> that.
wiki can say "official" or "must", but it's still just a wiki, what you
have to comply to is DPMT policy!
> "master" branch name is already used by upstream (This is *very* often
Hi there
> Remember that the page describing how things will work within the team once
> we've migrated to git is described here:
> https://wiki.debian.org/Python/GitPackaging
> We'll make that page official once the migration is done.
I've using git for some years now, and so does upstream in mo
On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 9:26 AM, Stefano Rivera wrote:
> Hi Barry (2015.10.10_21:02:00_+0200)
>> I don't want to wiki-churn so what do you think about backing out this change
>> and suggesting the ssh config instead?
>
> I'd suggest ssh config too. +1.
+1 on .ssh/config, I'm gonna change it now
On Oct 11, 2015, at 12:28 AM, Brian May wrote:
>What branches do I need to put the debian/README.source file in? There are
>six debian/* branches, don't think it is a good idea to try and maintain a
>consistent debian/README.source in all branches.
>
>Maybe debian/experimental would be sufficient?
On Monday, October 12, 2015 08:13:41 PM Daniel Stender wrote:
> I've got a push back error here:
>
> $ git push
> Counting objects: 22, done.
> Delta compression using up to 4 threads.
> Compressing objects: 100% (21/21), done.
> Writing objects: 100% (22/22), 2.72 KiB | 0 bytes/s, done.
> Total 2
On 08.10.2015 17:06, Stefano Rivera wrote:
> Hi Barry (2015.10.02_16:24:28_+0200)
>> 8-Oct - Assuming no objections or showstoppers, turn off write access to all
>> of DPMT svn.
>
> Done. And kicking off the migration now...
>
> SR
Thanks for the work, things likes automatically updated Vcs fiel
On Sun, 11 Oct 2015, Brian May wrote:
> What branches do I need to put the debian/README.source file in? There are
> six debian/* branches, don't think it is a good idea to try and maintain a
> consistent debian/README.source in all branches.
>
> Maybe debian/experimental would be sufficient? Or p
Hi Brian (2015.10.10_00:22:09_+0200)
> what about "Merge SVN"? Is this the same thing or different?
The svn history goes beyond the most recent upload to the archive, but
couldn't be automatically merged into the upload history.
> What is "Orphaned tags"?
There were tags that aren't linked into
Hi Barry (2015.10.10_21:02:00_+0200)
> I don't want to wiki-churn so what do you think about backing out this change
> and suggesting the ssh config instead?
I'd suggest ssh config too. +1.
SR
--
Stefano Rivera
http://tumbleweed.org.za/
+1 415 683 3272
On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 at 09:55 Barry Warsaw wrote:
> Probably so. I have a checkout of python-django here and it seems to
> already
> be in git. I haven't looked at the converted svn->git repo yet, but I'm
> wondering if what was converted was just old and out of date? I'm pretty
> sure
> it was
On 10/10/2015 12:16 AM, Brian May wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 at 00:24 Barry Warsaw wrote:
>
>> 5-Oct - Do one last test run with an updated svn dump. Put the results in
>> a
>> public place for folks to play with and comment on.
>>
>> 8-Oct - Assuming no objections or showstoppers, turn off wri
On Oct 10, 2015, at 12:18 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
>You need to specify which username to connect to over SSH. I have
>updated the Wiki page above to clarify this.
Hmm, I'm not sure about this recommendation. I don't include my user name in
the url, and I'm pretty sure Mattia's suggestion to set th
On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 at 12:18 Ben Finney wrote:
> Now that you already have the remote configured, you can re-configure it
> with:
>
> $ git remote set-url origin git+ssh://
> usern...@git.debian.org/git/python-modules/tools/python-modules.git
>
> where “origin” is the name of the remote, and
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 12:18:20PM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> Brian May writes:
>
> > On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 at 19:26 Stefano Rivera wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Here:
> > > https://wiki.debian.org/Python/GitPackaging#Where_do_the_team.27s_git_branches_live.3F
> >
> > I seem to have problems with this bec
Brian May writes:
> On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 at 19:26 Stefano Rivera wrote:
>
> >
> > Here:
> > https://wiki.debian.org/Python/GitPackaging#Where_do_the_team.27s_git_branches_live.3F
>
> I seem to have problems with this because my username on my local box is
> "brian" however my username on git.debia
On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 at 19:26 Stefano Rivera wrote:
>
> Here:
> https://wiki.debian.org/Python/GitPackaging#Where_do_the_team.27s_git_branches_live.3F
>
>
I seem to have problems with this because my username on my local box is
"brian" however my username on git.debian.org is "bam". There doesn't
a
On Oct 09, 2015, at 10:30 PM, Brian May wrote:
>Ok, I probably should create another thread to discuss this for Django then.
>
>Also, contrary to the rules we just agreed on, this sounds like one rare
>time when all uploaders should be contacted before moving any repositories
>around.
Probably so
On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 at 18:58 Stefano Rivera wrote:
> It migrated everything that's in SVN. What happens to the result is up
> to us. We can replace migrated results with existing git packages.
>
Ok, I probably should create another thread to discuss this for Django then.
Also, contrary to the ru
On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 at 19:01 Stefano Rivera wrote:
> Things that need to be looked at:
> http://whiteboard.debian.net/dpmt-git-migration.wb
>
Not sure what the headings mean. "Git packages moved out the way" seems
obvious - and probably exactly what I mentioned before with Django, but
what about
On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 at 00:24 Barry Warsaw wrote:
> 5-Oct - Do one last test run with an updated svn dump. Put the results in
> a
> public place for folks to play with and comment on.
>
> 8-Oct - Assuming no objections or showstoppers, turn off write access to
> all
> of DPMT svn.
>
> 9-Oct - One
On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 13:34 -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Oct 09, 2015, at 06:46 PM, Arthur de Jong wrote:
> > Perhaps an email to d-d-announce would be in order.
>
> Good idea, thanks.
Thanks everyone for the hard work. Time for me to learn a new tool ;)
--
-- arthur - adej...@debian.org - h
On Oct 09, 2015, at 06:46 PM, Arthur de Jong wrote:
>Perhaps an email to d-d-announce would be in order.
Good idea, thanks.
-Barry
pgpt4EKqpYkKX.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 10:47 -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> I'd also like to send an email to debian-devel@ inviting people who
> may have abandoned the DPMT because of our use of subversion, to come
> back to the team.
Perhaps an email to d-d-announce would be in order. I for one don't
regularly rea
On Oct 09, 2015, at 10:01 AM, Stefano Rivera wrote:
>And it's done.
\o/
Thank you for all your amazing work on this Stefano!
>Things that need to be looked at:
>http://whiteboard.debian.net/dpmt-git-migration.wb
>
>Please mark them off if you've looked at them.
I've done an updating pass throu
Hi Barry (2015.10.05_17:36:05_+0200)
> Is there some documentation on how to use these scripts, or set up mr? Or
> would that be obvious for anybody who's used mr before?
Fairly obvious. It's pretty simple.
> Can you add something about mr to https://wiki.debian.org/Python/GitPackaging
Here:
h
Hi debian-python (2015.10.08_17:06:29_+0200)
> Done. And kicking off the migration now...
And it's done.
Things that need to be looked at:
http://whiteboard.debian.net/dpmt-git-migration.wb
Please mark them off if you've looked at them.
SR
--
Stefano Rivera
http://tumbleweed.org.za/
+1 41
Hi Brian (2015.10.09_01:52:20_+0200)
> Will the migration do packages like python-django?
It migrated everything that's in SVN. What happens to the result is up
to us. We can replace migrated results with existing git packages.
SR
--
Stefano Rivera
http://tumbleweed.org.za/
+1 415 683 3272
On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 at 02:06 Stefano Rivera wrote:
> Done. And kicking off the migration now...
>
Great!
Will the migration do packages like python-django?
Just thinking that python-django in subversion is old, and the version in
git doesn't (yet) use git-dpm; you don't want the migration chang
Hi Barry (2015.10.02_16:24:28_+0200)
> 8-Oct - Assuming no objections or showstoppers, turn off write access to all
> of DPMT svn.
Done. And kicking off the migration now...
SR
--
Stefano Rivera
http://tumbleweed.org.za/
+1 415 683 3272
Hi Brian (2015.10.06_02:29:35_+0200)
> Thinking it might be good to have a list somewhere of packages that should
> get manually checked (and where this hasn't happened yet) after the
> migration is complete. Otherwise we might all assume somebody else has
> checked a package, and it gets forgotten
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 2015-10-05 23:24, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Oct 05, 2015, at 10:36 PM, Stefano Rivera wrote:
>
>> How about: We move away existing repositories, and put the
>> migrated ones in the /packages/ path. If people have existing
>> repositories, that t
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 at 02:49 Barry Warsaw wrote:
> Waiting longer isn't an option IMHO. It's helping to add to the
> dysfunction
> of the team. I will also offer to help if the 3.5 transition gets stuck
> because of the git conversion.
>
Hurry up and break my packages :-)
Do the Vcs-* headers
On Oct 05, 2015, at 07:12 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>I did an update (not uploaded) of webob from this migration and it worked
>perfectly. But it's a simple package without patches. I'll try a few more.
Similarly for ply 3.8. The nice thing here is that there were several quilt
patches that got
On Oct 03, 2015, at 08:52 PM, Stefano Rivera wrote:
>So, here is a migration at r34461:
>https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/python-modules/svn-migration/
I did an update (not uploaded) of webob from this migration and it worked
perfectly. But it's a simple package without patches. I'll try a few m
On Oct 05, 2015, at 10:36 PM, Stefano Rivera wrote:
>How about: We move away existing repositories, and put the migrated ones
>in the /packages/ path. If people have existing repositories, that
>they'd prefer to use, they can move the migrated ones out the way, and
>theirs back. But they have to o
Hi IOhannes (2015.10.05_12:07:33_+0200)
> >> sorry, i forgot to ask another question: how will the packages
> >> already maintained in git be handled?
> >
> > Up to their maintainers (assuming they're following team
> > standards). If people only have one git package, for testing, each,
> > then t
On Oct 05, 2015, at 10:32 PM, Stefano Rivera wrote:
>Hi Barry (2015.10.05_17:51:41_+0200)
>> >and other 9, for a grand total of 109 packages that cannot be
>> >converted to git, 13.5% of DPMT (oh, what about PAPT?)
>>
>> I've wondered about PAPT too. I don't touch those nearly as often, but
>> e
Hi Barry (2015.10.05_17:51:41_+0200)
> >and other 9, for a grand total of 109 packages that cannot be
> >converted to git, 13.5% of DPMT (oh, what about PAPT?)
>
> I've wondered about PAPT too. I don't touch those nearly as often, but
> eventually yes, they should come under the same vcs regime,
Hi,
these old SVN repos could be spared and removed:
On 03.10.2015 20:52, Stefano Rivera wrote:
> The errors:
>
> Cannot "git-dpm init" package: gamera
is already in: git://anonscm.debian.org/python-modules/packages/gamera.git
> Cannot "git-dpm init" package: nltk
old/obsolete packaging, the
On Monday, October 05, 2015 11:49:01 AM Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Oct 04, 2015, at 08:03 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> >am I the only one thinking it's quite a huge number to be handled by
> >hand? and whose hands will be the ones converting these packages?
> >yours or Barry's dont seem enough and others
On Oct 04, 2015, at 08:31 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>sorry, i forgot to ask another question: how will the packages already
>maintained in git be handled?
It should be easy. Just push it to the team's vcs. If it's not already in
git-dpm it's pretty easy to bootstrap. Essentially just one call to
On Oct 04, 2015, at 08:03 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>and other 9, for a grand total of 109 packages that cannot be
>converted to git, 13.5% of DPMT (oh, what about PAPT?)
I've wondered about PAPT too. I don't touch those nearly as often, but
eventually yes, they should come under the same vcs regim
On Oct 04, 2015, at 08:03 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>am I the only one thinking it's quite a huge number to be handled by
>hand? and whose hands will be the ones converting these packages?
>yours or Barry's dont seem enough and others will need training/time.
I'm happy to pitch in if a maintainer ne
On Oct 03, 2015, at 08:52 PM, Stefano Rivera wrote:
>So, here is a migration at r34461:
>https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/python-modules/svn-migration/
>
>The errors:
Some of these may already be in git, and hopefully git-dpm so don't actually
need a conversion. If it's in git but not git-dpm, it
On Oct 03, 2015, at 08:52 PM, Stefano Rivera wrote:
>No significant failures, but I wanted to setup an mr config, which I've done
>now:
>https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/python-modules/svn-migration/python-modules.git/
>The pkg-perl team has fancier tools, but they require more bookkeeping, so I
>m
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 2015-10-04 23:06, Stefano Rivera wrote:
> Hi Sandro (2015.10.04_21:31:07_+0200)
>> sorry, i forgot to ask another question: how will the packages
>> already maintained in git be handled?
>
> Up to their maintainers (assuming they're following tea
Hi Sandro (2015.10.04_21:31:07_+0200)
> sorry, i forgot to ask another question: how will the packages already
> maintained in git be handled?
Up to their maintainers (assuming they're following team standards).
If people only have one git package, for testing, each, then this
shouldn't be an issu
Hi Sandro (2015.10.04_21:03:29_+0200)
> and other 9, for a grand total of 109 packages that cannot be
> converted to git, 13.5% of DPMT (oh, what about PAPT?)
They're all converted. There are just some remaining steps to do by
hand, to reconcile the SVN history with upstream history, and convert
p
sorry, i forgot to ask another question: how will the packages already
maintained in git be handled?
On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 8:03 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 7:52 PM, Stefano Rivera wrote:
>> The errors:
>>
>> Cannot "git-dpm init" package: adhocracy
> [8<]
>> Cannot "git-dpm
Hi,
Le dimanche 04 oct. 2015 à 20:03:29 (+0100), Sandro Tosi a écrit :
> am I the only one thinking it's quite a huge number to be handled by
> hand? and whose hands will be the ones converting these packages?
> yours or Barry's dont seem enough and others will need training/time.
There's a point
On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 7:52 PM, Stefano Rivera wrote:
> The errors:
>
> Cannot "git-dpm init" package: adhocracy
[8<]
> Cannot "git-dpm init" package: urlgrabber
those are 98 packages
> I think these are mostly because the package has never been uploaded to
> Debian, or has a new release staged,
Hi Daniele (2015.10.03_21:36:52_+0200)
> charade was fortunately merged into chardet so we can also remove the SVN
> repository (or ignore it).
Yeah, I think there'll be a bunch of those. I basically migrated
everything from the SVN history, that didn't break horrifically. Then we
can strip it do
Hello Stefano,
many thanks for working on this!
On Saturday 03 October 2015 20:52:21 Stefano Rivera wrote:
[CUT list of packages]
> Cannot "git-dpm init" package: python-charade
charade was fortunately merged into chardet so we can also remove the SVN
repository (or ignore it).
Cheers,
--
Da
Hi Sandro (2015.10.03_12:47:20_+0200)
> I probably didnt make myself clear at first, let me retry: what were
> the problems that -in the last period- delayed the conversion?
No significant failures, but I wanted to setup an mr config, which I've
done now:
https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/python-mod
On Oct 03, 2015, at 03:50 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>if the last is a strong requirement, honestly it seems fragile: ~/.gitconfig
>applies to all the git repos I have (and I may want to specify a tag format
>there), while what is set in debian/.git-dpm (is this the file where the tag
>format is set r
> A good way to test that (when Stefano puts up the next test conversion) is to
> make some change, then `git-dpm tag` and verify that the tag form is correct.
> Be sure you don't have any settings in ~/.gitconfig though.
if the last is a strong requirement, honestly it seems fragile:
~/.gitconfig
On Oct 03, 2015, at 11:47 AM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>what were the problems that -in the last period- delayed the conversion? were
>they just lack of time (understandable) or were they technical in the
>conversion process?
The very last patch I forwarded to Stefano involved correctly setting the tag
On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Stefano Rivera wrote:
> Hi Sandro (2015.10.02_22:46:00_+0200)
>> those are not many days to review the results of the conversions: can
>> you (or Stefano) share what were the problems that delayed the
>> transition, so that we can check in particular those aspects
Hi Sandro (2015.10.02_22:46:00_+0200)
> those are not many days to review the results of the conversions: can
> you (or Stefano) share what were the problems that delayed the
> transition, so that we can check in particular those aspects of the
> packages we know the most?
I did that several month
On Oct 02, 2015, at 09:46 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>those are not many days to review the results of the conversions: can
>you (or Stefano) share what were the problems that delayed the
>transition, so that we can check in particular those aspects of the
>packages we know the most?
Stefano has put
On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> 5-Oct - Do one last test run with an updated svn dump. Put the results in a
> public place for folks to play with and comment on.
>
> 8-Oct - Assuming no objections or showstoppers, turn off write access to all
> of DPMT svn.
those are not ma
76 matches
Mail list logo
