News from the GNOME Team
Hello,
Some news from the Gnome Packaging tools :
1- The SVN repository is opened :
---------------------------------
You can browse it here :
http://svn.debian.org/viewcvs/pkg-gnome/
For the moment the root has 3 dirs :
- packages : which contains the packages dirs with the debian/ files
(I've uploaded file-roller as an example).
- docs : for the docs
- tools : for the others stuffs
If that can help somebody, to connect the SVN, I've added this to
~/.subversion/servers :
[groups]
pkg-gnome = pkg-gnome.alioth.debian.org
[pkg-gnome]
svn-tunnel = ssh
To "checkout" the SVN:
svn co svn+ssh://pkg-gnome.alioth.debian.org/svn/pkg-gnome/ls
2- gnome-pkg-tools package :
----------------------------
I've just uploaded a gnome-pkg-tools package with the list of team
uploaders. The package will probably contains some other stuffs later
but for the moment we just need to have the uploader list.
3- Packages management :
------------------------
The idea to have a debhelper module for {gnome:team} doesn't work (the
.dsc file doesn't contains the Uploaders field in this way).
So the pkg-gnome-tools contains the list in a text file
(/usr/share/pkg-gnome-tools/team_members).
This solution work fine (advices are welcome):
* add gnome-pkg-tools to Build-Depends
* mv control -> control.in
* "Uploaders:" in the control.in Debian GNOME Maintainers
<pkg-gnome-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org>, @GNOME_TEAM@
* in debian/rules :
gnome_team = $(shell cat /usr/share/gnome-pkg-tools/team_members)
clean:
sed "s/@GNOME_TEAM@/$(gnome_team)/" debian/control.in > debian/control
(clean :: for cdbs)
4- Other points :
-----------------
* Having the list of gnome team packages will probably make the QA
resume not very easy to read (10 standards packages in the middle
of the > 70 Gnome ones ...). Perhaps it'll nice to have the
co-maintains package in a different table ?
Any advice on that ?
All the comments/feedbacks/advices are welcome
Cheers,
Sebastien Bacher
PS: nautilus needs 3 more days (libxml2 delay) to reach testing and we
should have gnome2.2 in testing
Reply to: