Re: Condor Upload

[Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu>]

Hi again,

I admit I had quite some hope that we would manage to get condor into
shape in the end of last year.  Unfortunately this did not happen.
I wonder whether it is more in the sense of our users to remove the
really outdated version of condor from Debian at all now since it is
clear that it will not reach the next stable release any more.  Any
new upload of what we have needs to pass Debian New queue anyway.

What do you think?

Kind regards
   Andreas.

PS: I perfectly understand that you are busy and the Debian packaging
    might have lower priority.  So if you do not manage to respond in
    the next month I'll decide myself and will ask for removal.
    No matter what will happen I'll happily help you to re-introduce
    any new version of condor and you can ping me about this in
    future.

Am Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 08:32:20PM +0100 schrieb Andreas Tille:
> Hi Tim,
> 
> seems we lost track from condor again.  Due to the fact that the freeze
> process is starting tomorrow and ftpmaster should not accept libraries
> with version bumps, it is not possible that condor will be part of the
> next stable release.
> 
> I really hope you will continue working on this package anyway, to get
> it somehow into shape may be for backports.
> 
> Kind regards
>    Andreas.
> 
> Am Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 03:35:19PM +0100 schrieb Andreas Tille:
> > Hi Tim,
> > 
> > Am Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 06:19:05AM -0600 schrieb Tim Theisen:
> > > We want to stay with the 10.0.x versions are these are our LTS versions and
> > > quite stable.
> > > 
> > > The 10.1.x versions are our feature releases and have a short support
> > > lifetime.
> > 
> > Thanks for the helpful clarification.  I've adapted d/watch to report
> > only even minor version numbers (which is a bit weak since it will not
> > report 10.10 but there is some time left until then. ;-))
> >  
> > > So, for Debian I think that it is best to stay with any version where 0 is
> > > the second number.
> > 
> > Done in Git.
> >  
> > > Could you give me the steps to add the pristine tar. I have never done that
> > > and I don't fully understand it. Do you start with our official tarball, or
> > > generate one from the github repository?
> > 
> > The generation is done by uscan via
> > 
> >    uscan --verbose --force-download
> > 
> > and the import of pristine-tar is done via
> > 
> >    gbp import-orig --pristine-tar --no-interactive /PATH/TO/condor_VERSION.orig.tar.xz
> > 
> > I know there is some gbp command which does everything in one rush but
> > since I always forget this one this is my workflow. ;-)
> > 
> > > There is one file in msconfig, do_tests.pl. It is required to run our test
> > > suite on all platforms. I know that this file is logically in the wrong
> > > directory. I will restore it at some future date.
> > 
> > Thanks a lot for the additional background hint.  I've adapted
> > Files-Excluded in d/copyright accordingly.  It looks a bit nasty, but
> > well, it does what it is supposed to do. ;-)
> > 
> > > More answers below.
> > > 
> > > As always, your help is greatly appreciated.
> > > 
> > > On 11/23/22 02:59, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > > > I did the following other changes:
> > > > 
> > > >    1. Added pristine-tar for the **latest** upstream release
> > > >       (your packaging was 10.0.0 - I injected 10.1.1)
> > 
> > Reverted to 10.0.0.
> > 
> > > >    2. I removed dir msconfig/ completely from upstream source
> > > >       since it seems to be Windows only
> > 
> > Left msconfig/do_tests.pl where it is.
> > 
> > > >    3. I had to tweak dh_install files since the upstream build
> > > >       does not install to debian/tmp/usr any more but rather to
> > > >       debian/tmp.  This is **not** **fully** **fixed** - some
> > > >       of the debian/*.install files do not find the files mentioned
> > > >       there.  Please fix this.
> > > >       Note: There is no need to specify debian/tmp in the
> > > >             beginning since this is default.
> > > Thank you for the tip. This was done before my time by Michael Hanke.
> > 
> > It might be that in some ancient compat level of debhelper this was
> > needed.  So its no mistake in principle - just not a nice reading for
> > your fellow team members.
> > 
> > > > I have no idea what might have caused this change and I started working
> > > > on this in commit 5cde13597e7[3] - but I did not finished it since I'm
> > > > not sure how the package layout should be done.
> > > Something changed somewhere such that the files are not landing where they
> > > belong.
> > 
> > Do you see any chance to move them right into place?
> > 
> > Hope this helps
> >      Andreas.
> > 
> > -- 
> > http://fam-tille.de
> 
> -- 
> http://fam-tille.de
> 
> 

-- 
http://fam-tille.de