Status of pythondialog in Debian

2014-10-17 Thread Florent Rougon
Hello, As the upstream maintainer of pythondialog, I feel a bit concerned about its status in Debian, in particular about what is going to go into jessie. In short, I'd rather see the package removed from Debian than stay in the current status. The package that is currently in unstable is terribl

Re: Status of pythondialog in Debian

2014-10-17 Thread Barry Warsaw
Hi Florent, On Oct 17, 2014, at 04:17 PM, Florent Rougon wrote: >As the upstream maintainer of pythondialog, I feel a bit concerned about >its status in Debian, in particular about what is going to go into >jessie. In short, I'd rather see the package removed from Debian than >stay in the current

Re: Status of pythondialog in Debian

2014-10-17 Thread Matthias Klose
Am 17.10.2014 um 17:03 schrieb Barry Warsaw: > Hi Florent, > > On Oct 17, 2014, at 04:17 PM, Florent Rougon wrote: > >> As the upstream maintainer of pythondialog, I feel a bit concerned about >> its status in Debian, in particular about what is going to go into >> jessie. In short, I'd rather se

Re: Keeping upstream commits separate from Debian packaging commits

2014-10-17 Thread Dimitri John Ledkov
On 17 October 2014 07:39, Tristan Seligmann wrote: > On 16 October 2014 20:12, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: >> >> >> Tristan Seligmann wrote: >>> If you are fetching the upstream revisions / tags into your packaging >>> repository, you can use the upstream tag exactly as-is, no need to >>> re-ta

Re: Status of pythondialog in Debian

2014-10-17 Thread Florent Rougon
Hi, Barry Warsaw wrote: > Please note that this is not a team-maintained package. We could do a > non-maintainer upload of it, but I'd rather see either 1) Adam, the current > maintainer CC'd here, update the package, or 2) have Adam move the package to > the Debian Python team, where we could

Re: Keeping upstream commits separate from Debian packaging commits

2014-10-17 Thread Tristan Seligmann
On 17 October 2014 17:19, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: > There are different tag types in git. "Soft" are just named commit > references and indeed can be renamed at will / point to new commits, > however signed tags encode: > object SHA1id > type type-of-above > tag tag-name > tagger normal user na

Re: Keeping upstream commits separate from Debian packaging commits

2014-10-17 Thread Dimitri John Ledkov
On 17 October 2014 16:57, Tristan Seligmann wrote: > On 17 October 2014 17:19, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: >> There are different tag types in git. "Soft" are just named commit >> references and indeed can be renamed at will / point to new commits, >> however signed tags encode: >> object SHA1id >