Re: Advice/Opinions regarding shovill

[Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu>]

Hi Nilesh,

Am Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 11:17:51PM +0530 schrieb Nilesh Patra:
> I had packaged shovill, which is a workflow package
> roughly two years ago. However, pretty soon I had realised,
> for every analysis you want to do, you need to _manually_ modify the
> bin/shovill file[1]
> 
> Since in debian, it is in /usr/bin/shovill, you need to be modifying that file
> for each and every analysis when you want to change the adapter file.
> Since that is ugly, I had written code for
> a command line option that circumvents this manual modification and sent a PR
> upstream[2]

Thanks a lot for your effort.

> Since we want to be inlined with what upstream is doing, I did not change it in debian
> package as that would mean diverging from there. I even after pinging several times, only
> to realise that upstream simply ignored it.

That's a shame.  In many cases upstream is happy about enhancements,
specifically if suggested as PR.

> And so, since this package is not properly usable (without root permissions) I am planning
> ahead to merge this cli opt feature in the debian package anyway and upload, mentioning
> this in d/NEWS that we are different in this aspect.
> 
> Do you think this is fine or would you have any better suggestions?

I have no better suggestion.  I guess its not the only package where we
have several enhancements over upstream even if I absolutely subscribe
that we should rather avoid it if possible.

> Also, do you think it makes sense to upload this also in stable-p-u?

This should be answered by a user of this package.

Kind regards

    Andreas.

> [1]: https://github.com/tseemann/shovill/tree/master/bin
> [2]: https://github.com/tseemann/shovill/pull/147



-- 
http://fam-tille.de