On Wed, Feb 16, 2005 at 08:04:21AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
<snip>
Hi Martin,
>
> source package: dsc + (diff) + orig.tar.gz
> binary package: deb
> source upload: changes + list of files therein
I added some of this to my diagram. not 100% yet.
<snip>
> nah, we turn software into debian packages by debianising them, and
> then using dpkg-genchanges to create the changes file. Please read
> its manpage, in particular about the -sa, -sd, and -si options to
> see which files the changes file will list.
>
> the upload consists of the source package and the binary package,
> unless the debian revision is greater than 1, in which case the
> orig.tar.gz file is not included.
I added some of this, too.
> > > h. There are more rules as to when packages migrate from unstable to
> > > testing.
> >
> > ACK. I'm not familar with all possibilities and also not sure how much
> > space it would take to include it. maybe a 'subprocess' box?
>
> you could just say "meets requirements for testing"
<snip>
> > > To get our graphs onto www.debian.org, I assume we file bugs against
> > > that pseudo-package.
> >
> > there is an existing package that could include these? or to make an
> > ITP?
>
> www.debian.org is a pseudo package:
>
> http://www.debian.org/Bugs/pseudo-packages
I saw this[1]. So the bug would be something like:
"www.debian.org: needs development diagram from package life cycle
(and oh BTW, I have one here[2] and here[3]!)"
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=www.debian.org
[2] http://kmark.pipeline.com/newdebian.png
[2] http://kmark.pipeline.com/newdebian.dia
-Kev
--
counter.li.org #238656 -- goto counter.li.org and be counted!
(__)
(oo)
/------\/
/ | ||
* /\---/\
~~ ~~
...."Have you mooed today?"...
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature