[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Request to Join Project pkg-haskell from Ilias Tsitsimpis (iliastsi-guest)



Hi Joachim,

On Sun, May 08, 2016 at 11:53PM, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> welcome! Anything in particular you are interested in?

Thanks! I was thinking of starting with updating some existing packages,
in order to get myself familiar with the procedures and practices of the
team. I believe the haskell-language-python package (an update for which
was requests a few days ago in the irc channel) is a good candidate. I
have already tested it with package-plan and there doesn't seem to be
any integration errors. What do you think?

> The Haskell Group has a few under-documented procedures and practices,
> it might take a while to get used to it. In any case, don’t be shy and
> ask on IRC or on the mailing list.

I noticed that almost all of the packages maintained by the Haskell
Group are of priority extra. Following a recent discussion on
debian-devel[1], I believe most of these packages belong to priority
'Optional'. Is there any reason not to change this?

I also noticed that the uploads are not marked as 'Team uploads' and in
many cases the uploader is not listed in the Uploaders field. As a
result, lintian reports changelog-should-mention-nmu. Is there a
consensus about which is preferred (using the 'Team uploads' or adding
oneself to the Uploaders field)?

> I suggest you read through the information at
> https://wiki.debian.org/Haskell and subscribe to all three mailinglists
> mentioned there.

In the GettingStarted[2] document, it is stated that:

| Until we get our local changes pushed to upstream, you need to
| locally build an experimental cabal-debian tool.

It seems to me that those changes have been pushed upstream. Is that
correct? Should I update the wiki?

[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2016/04/msg00196.html
[2] https://wiki.debian.org/Haskell/CollabMaint/GettingStarted#Download_Experimental_DHG_Version_of_cabal-debian

Thanks,
Ilias


Reply to: