Hey Steve, Looking into it, I'll take care of that.
Kind regards, Rudra Saraswat On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 1:34 AM Steve Langasek <steve.langa...@ubuntu.com> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 12:37:17AM +0530, Rudra Saraswat wrote: > > Hey Steve, > > > Sorry, I missed your email. Thanks for the reminder. Here are the answers > > to your questions: > > > > If https://gitlab.com/ubuntu-unity/unity/unity is where you are doing > > > upstream development, could you please update the metadata in the > > > package to reflect this? > > > Sure, I'll make sure to mention this to Dmitry (mitya57), as I'm unable > to > > update the Unity project metadata on Launchpad myself. > > To be clear, what I'm referring to is the metadata *in the package* that > points to the wrong place. > > $ cat debian/watch > version=3 > opts=dversionmangle=s/daily.*// \ > https://launchpad.net/unity/+download > .*/unity-([0-9.]+)\.tar\.(?:xz|bz2|gz) > $ grep launchpad.net/unit debian/control > Homepage: https://launchpad.net/unity > $ > > > On Tue, 19 Dec 2023, 23:41 Steve Langasek, < > tionssteve.langa...@ubuntu.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Rudra, > > > > > > I'm resending the below email and cc:ing Maik this time, as I have not > > > gotten any response to the remaining questions. Since you mentioned > having > > > trouble receiving the previous email, I had pinged you about this > twice on > > > IRC but did not receive a response there either. > > > > > > While the Ubuntu Unity flavor appears to be in generally good shape for > > > 24.04 LTS, being unable to reach the flavor lead via the standard > > > communication channels of the Ubuntu project is concerning. > > > > > > Other than this, if you can address my request below, I'm happy to > > > recommend > > > Ubuntu Unity for LTS status to the TB. > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 09:53:08AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > > On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 05:49:59PM +0530, Rudra Saraswat wrote: > > > > > Thank you for your response. > > > > > > > > > Flavor's support plan presented to Tech Board and approved; > support > > > plan > > > > > > should indicate period of time if beyond 18 months (3 yrs or 5 > yr), > > > key > > > > > > contacts, and setting expectations as to level of support. > > > > > > > > As with our previous non-LTS releases, we expect to support the LTS > > > for 3 > > > > > years, not 5. > > > > > > > Ok. > > > > > > > > Maik is in fact on IRC ("Maik" on Libera). > > > > > > > Ok; note that this is not the IRC nick listed on the referenced wiki > > > page :) > > > > > > > > We plan to continue maintaining the Unity package set, releasing > fixes > > > for > > > > > bugs and security issues, as well as any issues that might prop up > in > > > other > > > > > related packages in general use by Ubuntu Unity users. > > > > > > > > > Since Canonical is no longer the upstream for Unity, do you > > > > > > yourself the upstream now for the unity packages? I see > > > > > > debian/control for the unity source package still points > > > > > > https://launchpad.net/unity, but this is owned by ~unity-team > > > > > > has only ubuntu-core-dev and Canonical employees as members. > > > > > > latest unity package has an upstream version number > > > > > > '7.7.0+23.04.20230222.2' but there is no corresponding > .orig.tar.xz > > > > > > as part of the source, this is a native package; the debian/watch > > > > > > file also points back at https://launchpad.net/unity, which has > > > 7.4.0 > > > > > > as its latest release tarball. So it is entirely unclear to me > what > > > > > > the version number in this package is meant to indicate. > > > > > > > > Most of our development revolves around the main 'unity' package, > > > > > which is in active development, while the other packages are, like > you > > > > > mentioned, in maintenance mode. (unless there are significant > changes > > > > > necessitated by changes in the main Unity codebase) > > > > > > > > We haven't added any releases to the Unity Launchpad project, as it > > > > > simply serves as a host for the Launchpad Unity Git repository and > > > > > meets our needs. mitya57, a core-dev and member of our team and > > > > > package uploader, helps up keep > > > > > https://gitlab.com/ubuntu-unity/unity/unity (where we maintain the > > > > > Unity codebase) and the Launchpad repo in sync, which is used as an > > > > > upstream for all the distributions that offer Unity, and the > Launchpad > > > > > repo is just used to build the Unity packages, nothing more. > > > > > > > If https://gitlab.com/ubuntu-unity/unity/unity is where you are > doing > > > > upstream development, could you please update the metadata in the > > > package to > > > > reflect this? > > > > > > > > Sorry for the late response btw. It was only a few minutes ago > that I > > > > > realized you had already replied (I just received jbicha's email), > as > > > > > I haven't received either of your two replies for some reason. > > > > > > > Nothing late about it, we have months yet before these discussions > need > > > to > > > > be concluded. > > -- > Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS > Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. > Ubuntu Developer https://www.debian.org/ > slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org >
-- technical-board mailing list technical-board@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/technical-board
