Re: Please update fis-gtm package
Hi again Amul,
this is the last ping before I update what is currently in Git. We
*really* need to proceed now with fis-gtm package since we will face
Debian freeze for next stable release soon. (Not too soon but since the
last commit in Git that is not from me was in April last year it is
soon-ish ;-) ). I also have not yet seen any commit from Hari Kishore
who was added to the team at your request.
Please, pretty please, check Git
https://salsa.debian.org/med-team/fis-gtm
and comment on the current status (may be also addressing my repeated
question for reflecting the version inside the package name which
is IMHO not the best idea since it always delays the uploads).
Kind regards
Andreas.
On Tue, Jan 08, 2019 at 09:04:57AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi Amul,
>
> ping. Will you be able to check my latest commits and finalise the
> fis-gtm package. We should upload soonish since the freeze is
> approaching.
>
> Kind regards
>
> Andreas.
>
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 03:32:32PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > Hi Amul,
> >
> > may be you missed my last mail - just adding you in CC to avoid this.
> >
> > Kind regards
> >
> > Andreas.
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 02, 2018 at 08:25:55AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > > Hi Amul,
> > >
> > > On Sat, Dec 01, 2018 at 11:56:01AM -0500, Amul Shah wrote:
> > > >
> > > > It’s been a busy few months and I keep telling myself that I’ll do the fis-gtm package next week. We released V6.3-006 at the end of last month, but the corporate security goon squad decided to block SourceForge.net and we’re still awaiting for permission to access it from corporate resources.
> > >
> > > If there is another URL where your releases are available for download
> > > we could point the watch file to this alternative place.
> > >
> > > As a personal note: May be its time to leave SourceForge as hosting
> > > platform. There are more modern and way less advertising noise ones
> > > these days.
> > >
> > > > I tried searching (both in my email and via a mailing list search) for the package name discussion, but couldn’t find it. Could you resend it or remind me what the question is?
> > >
> > > The question is: The real binary package is renamed to always reflect
> > > even the latest minor version change. This always requires the fis-gtm
> > > package to pass Debian new queue. I was wondering with it might be
> > > sufficient to say for instance have a package named
> > >
> > > Package: fis-gtm-6.3
> > >
> > > instead of even adding -004, -006, etc. to the package name. I have no
> > > idea about the practival implications since I'm not a fis-gtm user but
> > > it might be worth discussing in your team whether the Debian packages
> > > are really used in all minor version changes.
> > >
> > > Kind regards
> > >
> > > Andreas.
> > >
> > > --
> > > http://fam-tille.de
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > http://fam-tille.de
> >
> >
>
> --
> http://fam-tille.de
>
>
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: