Re: FASTX-Toolkit on GitHub.
[Alexandre, we might consider using plain Git clones as well, just to
inform you about the discussion. It might make sense if you subscribe
this list.]
Hi Charles,
On Sat, Nov 09, 2013 at 04:42:47PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Sat, Nov 09, 2013 at 11:42:18AM +0900, Charles Plessy a écrit :
> >
> > Would people object if I would simply create a debian branch of the upstream
> > repositories from scratch and hence lose the commit history from the current
> > source packages ?
No objection against loosing history.
> For the Debian branch, it was not that hard after all.
>
> The Debian package for fastx-toolkit is on GitHub for the moment:
>
> https://github.com/Debian/fastx-toolkit
>
> If nobody objects, I will replace the current fastx-toolkit repository on
> Alioth by this one.
Fine for me. In any case we should have a clone on Alioth.
> Note that it does not contain the ‘pristine-tar’ and
> ‘upstream’ branches, which are not particularly useful anymore.
In any case you should add the needed workflow / tips how to deal
with this. I somehow wonder in how far two different people should
create an md5sum identical orig.tar. Seems with this workflow it
is not possible without using `apt-get source`.
> Currently, the package fails to build: changes upstream now let the hardening
> flags be passed to the compiler, which triggers fatal errors. I reported the
> issue at the following URL. I am sure that patches are very welcome.
>
> https://github.com/agordon/fastx_toolkit/issues/1
>
> I also opened a similar issue on libgtextutils.
>
> https://github.com/agordon/libgtextutils/issues/1
I might give it a try if the repository is in alioth and I can commit.
Seems not be to hard. Please, if you put advises into policy to let me
know if I should do this as quilt patches or commit directly to the
repository.
I'm specifically interested because we might adopt this workflow for
mne-python as well.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: