Re: [Doudoulinux-dev] Uploading DouDouLinux packages to Debian
Hi Jean-Michel,
thanks for your verbose answer.
On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 11:52:18PM +0100, Jean-Michel Philippe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > I keep on thinking we are speaking about the same kind of list. You can
> > add so called prospective packages to the list of existing packages:
>
> Ok, obviously I did not understand your notice then :). The purpose of
> your notice was to tell that it's possible to mix package description
> and package lists using the indicated format and tools, wasn't it?
Yes. If you need a quite extensive example mixing available packages in
Debian (marked green), packages that have some work done but are not
finished (marked yellow) and packages only on todo list but no work done
yet (marked red - mind the traffic light analogon) have a look here:
http://blends.debian.org/med/tasks/bio
It would be easy to add "yellow" packages to the doudoulinux-* tasks by
adding the according packages you have in DoudouLinux but not yet in
Debian.
> > The idea is to use metapackages on the live CD. The advantage is that
> > the metapackage creation procedure is verifying the availability of a
> > package once it is created. So in the long run maintaining the
> > metapackages is less work for with the additional profit of having
> > several QA tools and the web sentinel pages (where I created the
> > examples for).
>
> Ok. What we could easily do as a start, is creating new meta-packages in
> Debian Jr. that are just our package lists.
+1
> This way we would not spend
> to much time on thinking how to mix/split/purge/rename the existing
> lists (the main reason why I still haven't merged our lists into Jr).
I think it is better to do it this way instead of doing nothing. In
fact the existing tasks are not maintained for years. I could imagine
that the doudou-* tasks might replace the currently existing tasks but
first we need to look at something and than we can decide. There is no
point in letting old things blocking the new one just because they
exist.
> These lists may keep the prefix doudoulinux so that people easily know
> what it is about (and this would explain the existing redundancies with
> Jr packages).
For some intermediate state I'd regard this a sensible approach. Once
you are declaring the doudou-* tasks as "complete" (whatever complete
might mean) we can safely discuss what to do with the old tasks.
> > You might like to try filing a bug report with your translation patch to
> > the Debian bug tracking system. If the maintainer of the package might
> > include this at least into the Debian package you will not have
> > additional work. May be he even forwards the patch upstream.
>
> It seems the first step for us to get things better done is to produce
> sets of language patch files for apps (as Per proposed).
+1
> > I agree
> > that your translators doing a lot of work but doing it for DoudouLinux
> > exclusively is somehow in contrary to the cooperation principle of Free
> > Software and thus not sustainable.
>
> It is still publicly available though ;).
I noticed the smiley and I think that you mean this in the same way as I
that the mere fact that something is publicly available is no guarantee
that it is recognised and used.
> Some time ago I told some
> upstream projects where are our translations, but it did not seem to be
> used afterwards. They'd probably prefer us to participate directly to
> their projects.
There are different upstreams and your mileage might vary. I think
letting the patch migrate through Debian BTS might make it perceived
differently.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: