Hi Cory, Cordell Bloor, on 2022-10-13: > I've been working on librocprim2-dev (5.3.0-1). I think it just needs to be > updated with the ITP bug number (#1021695) and go through copyright review, > then it'll be ready for submission. The packaging depends on some of the > fixes for rocm-hipamd that are currently in experimental, so it would > probably go into experimental itself. The librocthrust2-dev (5.3.0-1) > package is still a work-in-progress, but it's very similar to rocprim and > should reach the same state within the next few days. That's great to read! I will be busy focusing on release critical bugs during a BSP this weekend, but I'll be happy to help with the review next week while migrating ROCm 5.2.3 to unstable, if no one beats me at one or both. I have a minor nitpick: you may want to refer to the source package name (rocprim, rocthrust), as one single source may produce several binary packages. I also see the control files of rocprim and rocthrust are limited to producing lib*-dev packages for the moment, which normally store only development headers, so I suppose the part of the packaging about routing files to the different locations is still work in progress. You can have a peek at the policy manual, notably the chapter on shared libraries[0] if you are interested in the topic. [0]: https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-sharedlibs.html > I'm not sure if Debian has explicit rules about who can do the copyright > review, but I don't feel comfortable doing it myself. If someone would be > willing to review those two packages, it would be appreciated! Anyone can write and review a d/copyright file. Historically it has been a free form text, but nowadays there is a standard DEP5 copyright 1.0 file format[1] which you can try to wrap up if you like. Formally on first upload of the package to the archive, it won't reach immediately debian sid or experimental. Instead it will reach the NEW queue[2] for the ftpmaster team to proceed to the last formal review of the package, including but not limited to[3] checking the d/copyright file for consistency and diminish the risks of unintended conflicts on terms or copyright violations; the process is mostly manual and can take some time, you can see rocrand still pending review for instance. [1]: https://dep-team.pages.debian.net/deps/dep5/ [2]: https://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html [3]: https://ftp-master.debian.org/REJECT-FAQ.html Thanks for your contributions! :) -- Étienne Mollier <emollier@emlwks999.eu> Fingerprint: 8f91 b227 c7d6 f2b1 948c 8236 793c f67e 8f0d 11da Sent from /dev/pts/2, please excuse my verbosity.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature