Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> The effort to upload a package is still the same: Integrating patches
>> into a package is something every DD should be able to do (either using
>> the .diff.gz directly or by leaving the patch manag
Last Thursday 21 July 2005 07:41, Lucas Nussbaum was like:
> First post on -qa for me, I am not a DD and I joined the list after
> Raphael's QA talk at RMLL.
> On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 08:19:57AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Le mercredi 20 juillet 2005 à 17:52 -0700, Thoma
* Raphael Hertzog ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) disait :
> > Presented like that, it might look less world-changing.
>
> That's the idea ... but I'd like to extend this system automatically to
> all orphaned packages.
A wiki page is being written at the moment, you can check it to see a
sumup of our propo
Le jeudi 21 juillet 2005 à 08:41 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> > > I'm fine with that, but I'm against making them official packages.
> >
> > That's not your call. The DD who checks the package decides if he wants
> > to upload it or not.
>
> What's the difference between your proposal and :
Le mercredi 20 juillet 2005 à 19:52 +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt a
écrit :
> Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > But building packages from a suvbersion repository can be done
> > automatically. So yes, we could provide automatically unofficial
> > packages to the users. And furthermor
Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But building packages from a suvbersion repository can be done
> automatically. So yes, we could provide automatically unofficial
> packages to the users. And furthermore it would be trivially simple for
> a DD to upload a new package...
Right, becaus
First post on -qa for me, I am not a DD and I joined the list after
Raphael's QA talk at RMLL.
On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 08:19:57AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Le mercredi 20 juillet 2005 à 17:52 -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG a écrit :
> > Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wr
Le mercredi 20 juillet 2005 à 17:52 -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG a écrit :
> Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > But building packages from a suvbersion repository can be done
> > automatically. So yes, we could provide automatically unofficial
> > packages to the users.
>
> I'm fine
Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But building packages from a suvbersion repository can be done
> automatically. So yes, we could provide automatically unofficial
> packages to the users.
I'm fine with that, but I'm against making them official packages.
Which means we need to do n
On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 04:14:38PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
It's possible that we over-estimate the "pros" but doing this can't harm
us, so there's no reason for you to stop us.
Who's stopping you? I'm not allowed to have the opinion that it's an
oversold idea? I already said that if you t
Le mercredi 20 juillet 2005 à 09:19 -0400, Michael Stone a écrit :
> >efforts. And, yes, a patch in a BTS is only accessible to developpers,
> >not to users. Users does not know how to apply a patch and compile a
> >program, this is why they use a distribution.
>
> So, ordinary users can't pull a
On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 01:49:15PM +0200, Benjamin BAYART wrote:
Recently (a few months ago) the debian-qa team did an update of dvidvi,
applying the patches that were in the BTS. Before that, bugs have been
in open state, some with patches attached, for more than 5 years.
But they're applied n
> > - with the bug tracking system, you have a patch which sleeps there for
> > years, waiting for someone to care
>
> Because, of course, the debian bts is inaccessible to everyone but
> debian developers...
Recently (a few months ago) the debian-qa team did an update of dvidvi,
applying the
On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 01:52:07PM +0200, Benjamin BAYART wrote:
No. They would submit patches, or via the bug tracking system, or via an
rcs. The main difference is the result produced:
- with the bug tracking system, you have a patch which sleeps there for
years, waiting for someone to care
Le Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 05:41:01AM -0400, Michael Stone:
>
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 10:34:05AM +0200, Benjamin BAYART wrote:
> >If a package is orphaned in Debian, but still have users and people
> >willing to maintain the software, this proposition can help.
>
> I'm still just not getting it.
On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 09:14:19AM +0200, Alexis Sukrieh wrote:
This proposal aims to fill the blank in such situations.
What blank? I checked--there are *no* patches in the BTS for dvidvi.
Maybe if there were some patches out there and the argument was about
making the process easier or somesu
On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 10:34:05AM +0200, Benjamin BAYART wrote:
If a package is orphaned in Debian, but still have users and people
willing to maintain the software, this proposition can help.
I'm still just not getting it. So you've got an external developer
community that will be active in
Le mardi 19 juillet 2005 à 10:34 +0200, Benjamin BAYART a écrit :
> > and I can't see how the proposal will add anything that
> > can't already be done if you have active users & developers.
>
> The main difference is between having developpers and having
> Debian-developpers. When you say a packa
> and I can't see how the proposal will add anything that
> can't already be done if you have active users & developers.
The main difference is between having developpers and having
Debian-developpers. When you say a package is orphaned this is a Debian
status, which might not be that right in the
* Michael Stone ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) disait :
> IMO, we lose far more points when people install packages which are in
> bad shape but haven't been removed because they don't have enough users
> to notice & file RC bugs.
Yes, I agree, but you are speaking about pure orphaned packages, I mean,
pack
On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 06:13:53PM +0200, Alexis Sukrieh wrote:
IMHO, when we drop packages from our archive just because they are
orphaned (I have the jpeg2ps example in mind) we definitely loose a
point (just think to the end-user point of view).
IMO, we lose far more points when people insta
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 12:49:32AM +0100, Rich Walker wrote:
>> And should the submitter of a bug be auto-subscribed to the bug? I
>> think at present it is possible to carry on a long debate on the BTS
>> without the original submitter knowing - which
> And I found that the debian-perl group is working quite well maintaining
> all their packages in a single subversion repository where all
> developers in the group have write access.
> :
> So I proposed something similar.
I personally agree with Raphaël and Benjamin.
IMHO, when we drop package
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > > The problem is then : we have knowledgeable people willing to help but
> > > we don't have a Debian maintainer for them. Benjamin sent several patchs
> > > in the BTS and they are still there... waiting to be applied.
> >
> > Any Debian developer could work on them.
>
Le lundi 18 juillet 2005 à 16:36 +0200, Martin Schulze a écrit :
> Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > I discussed this with Benjamin Bayart who is a TeX expert and gave me
> > some examples concerning some small packages like "dvi2dvi". He's not
> > willing to go through NM to become a Debian Maintainer be
Benjamin Bayart wrote:
> I do understand the difficulty to find people to maintain those
> packages. More over I understand this in my area: my main "skill" in
> free software is about TeX, and we are not many to be skilled in that
> area. To find people being skilled in TeX *and* in Debian and hav
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> I discussed this with Benjamin Bayart who is a TeX expert and gave me
> some examples concerning some small packages like "dvi2dvi". He's not
> willing to go through NM to become a Debian Maintainer because that's
> too much hassle just for maintaining one or two little pac
tim hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'd like to confirm this. A recent case in point was noteedit - a simple
> MIDI editor, which lost its maintainer last year, but still retained an
> active user-base. There are also multimedia applications that remain in
> active development by Linux Audio De
Hello,
As this is my first posting to this list, I'd better introduce myself. I'm a
non-DD lurker with an interest in media applications and learning the ropes
on qa issues. I hope to be able to put some effort into qa for the A/DeMuDi
CDD.
Last Friday 15 July 2005 16:00, Benjamin BAYART was l
[Same remark: I answer from the web package, so no quotation, sorry]
I agree with you, as you know :-)
That would lead to several groups like the debian-perl one, one of those
being debian-orphaned. Another, of more interest for me, would be a
debian-texware to maintain packages in the TeX world
[Sorry not to quote you, I'm answering from the web interfae]
There would be mainly two differences from the current situation:
1. A user of the package can have acces to the patched source and build
the fixed package automaticaly, this is a way to obtain the fixed
package without waiting fo
On Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 12:49:32AM +0100, Rich Walker wrote:
> And should the submitter of a bug be auto-subscribed to the bug? I
> think at present it is possible to carry on a long debate on the BTS
> without the original submitter knowing - which seems to miss the point?
Auto-subscription proba
Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Packages need to have maintainers -- meaning, someone needs to take
>> responsibility for the package. Orphaned packages *routinely* slip into
>> stable releases with release critical bugs that have been in
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Russ Allbery wrote:
>> I think that if we had active users of a package who would report the
>> bugs when they happen, orphaned packages wouldn't be as much of a risk.
>> They have undetected RC bugs not because there isn't a maintainer so
>> much as be
On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 01:07:28PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Packages need to have maintainers -- meaning, someone needs to take
> > responsibility for the package. Orphaned packages *routinely* slip into
> > stable releases with release critical
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Packages need to have maintainers -- meaning, someone needs to take
> responsibility for the package. Orphaned packages *routinely* slip into
> stable releases with release critical bugs that have been in the package
> for a year or more, sometimes eve
On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 05:00:21PM +0200, Benjamin BAYART wrote:
> Le Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 03:25:44PM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar:
> > As far as I can see though, there are not really technical problems
> > with the low maintainance of orphaned packages, but more the reason
> > that they are stil
On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 05:00:21PM +0200, Benjamin BAYART wrote:
When you say that, or you're wrong, or "nobody" is to be understood as
"nobody in the Debian developpers" in which case you're right. But the
fact that a package is of no interest to a Debian developper does not
prove the package to
Le Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 03:25:44PM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar:
>
> As far as I can see though, there are not really technical problems
> with the low maintainance of orphaned packages, but more the reason
> that they are still orphaned -- nobody has a really big interest in
> them.
When you say
I don't get it. If a maintainer still needs to review the patch and
upload it, how is this different than the current situation?
Mike Stone
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 02:48:39PM +0200, Benjamin BAYART wrote:
>
> Mike Stone:
> >
> > If you're pretty much automatically accepting any kind of contribution
> > it's not a debian package any more. Just set up your own package archive
> > somewhere for packages like this and encourage people to
Mike Stone:
>
> If you're pretty much automatically accepting any kind of contribution
> it's not a debian package any more. Just set up your own package archive
> somewhere for packages like this and encourage people to use it.
> notquitedebian.org is available...
My guess is that it sounds lik
On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 04:32:30PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> I'm still not convinced that this is really superior to just let them
> submit patches to the BTS, especially when considering the overhead of
> maintaining the repository and recording changes there. Not to give a
> false impress
Michael Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 07:46:36PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>> The whole discussion is about defining what is reasonable, what are the
>> limits and how can it be made working.
> No, you're looking to set up a special infrastructure to support some
On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 07:46:36PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
The whole discussion is about defining what is reasonable, what are the
limits and how can it be made working.
No, you're looking to set up a special infrastructure to support some
wacky corner cases. Why don't you just accept the
Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That's exactly the point of this discussion. I would probably do the
> same... so I thought that we could setup a friendly environment allowing
> a group of people to maintain those packages with the help of external
> contributors which are more inter
Le mercredi 13 juillet 2005 à 13:16 -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit :
> I would be willing to maintain dvidvi, and a few similar random packages
> like that that I don't use personally but that have a set of users that
> want them and supply patches for them, once I get through the NM process.
> While
Le mercredi 13 juillet 2005 à 17:33 -0400, Michael Stone a écrit :
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 07:27:58PM +0200, Benjamin Bayart wrote:
> >If you think it is satisfactory, then, well, perhaps there is nothing to
> >change and I'm wrong on that. But if you think it have to be improved,
> >my propositi
Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I would be willing to maintain dvidvi, and a few similar random
>> packages like that that I don't use personally but that have a set of
>> users that want them and supply patches for them, once I get
Rich Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Benjamin Bayart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> and almost each time with the right patch. But I maintain, for my own
>> use, a very large bunch of software pieces. One of those is dvidvi: I
>> use a "customised" debian package, which includes the various p
Benjamin Bayart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> and almost each time with the right patch. But I maintain, for my own
> use, a very large bunch of software pieces. One of those is dvidvi: I
> use a "customised" debian package, which includes the various patches I
> needed to make it work properly wi
Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> 3) There are about 1000 Debian developers and thousands of Debian
>>users out there.
>> 4) Not one of them has offered to maintain dvidvi, not you, not the
>>maintainers of the packages that depend o
On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 07:27:58PM +0200, Benjamin Bayart wrote:
If you think it is satisfactory, then, well, perhaps there is nothing to
change and I'm wrong on that. But if you think it have to be improved,
my proposition is just to accept more-or-less automaticaly the
contributions from the ou
Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 3) There are about 1000 Debian developers and thousands of Debian
>users out there.
> 4) Not one of them has offered to maintain dvidvi, not you, not the
>maintainers of the packages that depend on it
I would be willing to maintain dvidvi, a
Le Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 07:57:32PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld:
> >
> > As smooth an upgrade as with any other distribution of any operating
> > system, free or not.
>
> Ok, I can understand that it makes it you sad that a package you like
> and use should be removed from Debian unstable.
Well, yes
On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 07:07:06PM +0200, Benjamin Bayart wrote:
> Le Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 05:41:54PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld:
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 12:25:50PM +0200, Benjamin Bayart wrote:
> > > Le Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 04:14:52AM +0900, Masayuki Hatta:
> > > By the way I do have some o
Le Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 05:54:51PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld:
>
> But this doesn't depend on the availability of a VCS but on the
> availability of people to upload the package. Perhaps during
> creating the former you find the latter ones. But that's about
> marketing, not about technical solution
Le Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 05:41:54PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld:
>
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 12:25:50PM +0200, Benjamin Bayart wrote:
> > Le Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 04:14:52AM +0900, Masayuki Hatta:
> > By the way I do have some other patches on this package, but there seem
> > to be no emergency to subm
On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 02:18:51PM +0200, Benjamin Bayart wrote:
> Le Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 04:32:30PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld:
> But I disagree on your conclusion: if people just submit patches to the
> bug tracking system, the patches will not find a way to the users, since
> there is no maintain
On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 12:25:50PM +0200, Benjamin Bayart wrote:
> Le Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 04:14:52AM +0900, Masayuki Hatta:
> By the way I do have some other patches on this package, but there seem
> to be no emergency to submit :-)
You know #274276 ?
Gruesse,
--
Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTE
Le Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 04:32:30PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld:
[ I previously sent a "private" answer to Frank, because I didn't know I
was allowed to post to the mailing lists. Sorry if you receive some of
the informations twice. ]
> I'm still not convinced that this is really superior to just let
Le Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 04:14:52AM +0900, Masayuki Hatta:
>
> > The problem is then : we have knowledgeable people willing to help
> > but we don't have a Debian maintainer for them. Benjamin sent
> > several patchs in the BTS and they are still there... waiting to be
> > applied.
>
> I'm the mai
Hi,
This is kinda off-topic, but
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I discussed this with Benjamin Bayart who is a TeX expert and gave
> me some examples concerning some small packages like "dvi2dvi". He's
> not willing to go through NM to become a
On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 01:41:41PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Le mardi 12 juillet 2005 à 11:58 +0200, Frank Lichtenheld a écrit :
> > The idea of setting up a general sponsoring alioth project where
> > some DDs try to sponsor people even for packages they don't care about
> > (otherwise they
[ Moving the discussion to debian-qa where it belongs, setting the
reply-to accordingly ]
Le mardi 12 juillet 2005 à 11:58 +0200, Frank Lichtenheld a écrit :
> I think you are mixing two things here that should not be mixed,
> sponsoring non-DDs and handling orphaned packages. Either a package
> h
(Resent, sorry if you get this mail twice... I sent the initial message
to a wrong email address and i've been blocked by crossasssin)
Hello,
I gave a talk about Debian-QA last week during the Libre Software
Meeting in Dijon.
At the end we had an interesting discussion concerning the packages
wh
Hello,
I gave a talk about Debian-QA last week during the Libre Software
Meeting in Dijon.
At the end we had an interesting discussion concerning the packages
which have a very small userbase and for which we have troubles to find
a maintainer : oprhaned/unmaintained packages !
I discussed this
67 matches
Mail list logo
