On Thu, 2021-12-02 at 15:57 +0100, Stephan Lachnit wrote: > I think this would be the best path forward - it would probably be not > easy given that it changes entirely how the current system works, but > it might be well worth the effort. Working together with another > distribution would share the work for the distro. I'm sure if we are > willing to join them they would accommodate us if there are any > changes we would require (e.g. login via salsa instead of a fedora > account). At minimum we would need a way to map from release-monitoring.org package names to Debian source package names. Assuming they use Fedora source package names, then the Repology service provides such a mapping and we could presumably could get a periodic export of that. > This however I think is not a good idea. Repology is very nice to > check what versions other distros have, but for projects that don't > have any external language-specific package repository like e.g. > python, it would mean that we could easily miss a new release (think > small projects written in C that are not in any other distro) and > wrongly formatted version from other distros would impact us > (unlikely, but still bad in theory). I see using Repology as a complement to release-monitoring.org and uscan, not as an alternative to them. It enables use-cases that aren't possible with the other two. We automatically get version monitoring for packages that don't have other version monitoring mechanisms. We get monitoring of whether or not a particular package needs updating to a VCS snapshot instead of waiting for an official release. We get monitoring of versions even when upstream has moved to a different location not monitored by other mechanisms. There are probably other use-cases I can't think of right now. > And since it requires the same infrastructure changes as going with > release-monitoring.org, it would be better to just use that. I think it would need different changes, especially since Debian doesn't have the same realtime notifications stuff as Fedora does. > Yes that makes sense, what I wonder is how much change is needed for > putting watch files in a separate repo compared to going with > release-monitoring.org (I don't know enough about the inner workings > of our tools to answer this question). For the VCS idea it would be minimal, just vcswatch needs to also pull debian/watch files out of VCS repos with commits not yet pushed to Debian and then the version checking infra (zero idea where that went) needs to pay attention to that data. For fully moving debian/watch (and Homepage) out of Debian source packages there would need to be a lot more work, probably migrating to release-monitoring.org would be the way to go. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part