Hi, On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 03:27:13PM +0100, alberto fuentes wrote: > On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 3:00 PM, David Smith <sidicas2@gmail.com> wrote: > > Sabastian Reichel is around, he always shows up when there is a new > > version of tt-rss. sure. I just had lots of work to do for university in the last few weeks. This is done now and I will have more time for Debian stuff in the next days. > > In the mean time, is there anything you can do to help address those > > Lintian warnings? > > > > I was hoping there might be a way to address some of those Lintian > > warnings (http://mentors.debian.net/package/tt-rss) and get at least a > > couple of those handled in testing/unstable as well as the backport. > > yeah.. he opened this bug against [0] prototype-js so it doesnt need > patching it and it will get rid of the personalized js library > > [0] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=712252 right. IMHO this should be fixed before backporting the package. @Frank Habermann: Do you plan an upload of prototypejs in the near future? > The Experimental warning is false positive > The rest are quite trivial to handle by the maintainer himself. I can > provide patches if asked by Sebastian, but as i understand backports > should deviate as little as possible from testing, so I didnt touch > much in the backport I think the only other lintian warning is the apache configuration filename. I don't think changing only this justifies an upload. > > I'd like to work with you getting tt-rss backported to Wheezy, so let me > > know if there's anything I can do. I'll start with looking at those > > lintian warnings and seeing if I can figure out if it's possible to > > address them for testing/unstable so that they won't also end up in a > > backport. > > not much left for us to do but to have someone to upload it i think :> I would prefer to fix the patching in testing before doing the backport. This simplifies potential future backports a lot. > > The other thing on my mind is the updater that ships with tt-rss. I > > noticed that if you try to use it, it tends to break the package in > > Debian such that tt-rss doesn't work anymore. I'm not sure if the > > updater is shipped with the tt-rss package in Debian (haven't tried it > > in months), but if it is, maybe we can find a way to disable it so it's > > not so easy for a user to accidentally break the tt-rss package. Of > > course that doesn't stop somebody from downloading tt-rss from upstream, > > running the updater in that, and then breaking the installed package of > > tt-rss in Debian that way. It's one of those things that I've been > > trying for months to figure out a good solution for, and haven't come up > > with any yet. > > I think you are refering to the update feeds alternative daemon, dont you? > I never really tried to used since the default just works for me :> > > open the bug in testing and i can try to reproduce it and maybe fix it... No, he is refering to tt-rss's own updater. tt-rss comes with a script, which can be used to update its software (e.g. updating tt-rss from 1.10 to 1.11). I have thought about this for some time and I think the updater method should be replaced in the Debian package by a message similar to this one: "Upgrading tt-rss using this script is not supported by Debian's tt-rss version. Please use apt-get to install tt-rss updates." P.S.: The upstream roadmap of tt-rss assumes, that there will be a release today. So it may be worth waiting some more hours. -- Sebastian
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature