Re: Plans for rails & wheezy (Was: RFS: ruby-activemodel)
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 16:17, Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net> wrote:
> On 28/08/11 at 10:27 +0530, karim memon wrote:
>> >
>> > So please don't upload. Ruby is API mess even without multiple rails
>> > versions.
>> >
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > I haven't looked at the package, but I know that Ondřej Surý has been
>> > > doing some work on rails-related packages, so maybe he would like to
>> > > have a look (Added to Cc).
>> > >
>> > > Also, I was wondering what should be our plans for Rails in wheezy (2.3
>> > > vs 3.0). What do people think? (I'm clueless about rails)
>> > >
>> > > Lucas
>> >
>>
>> So do i need to stop working on this package? and what about the ITP, what
>> should it be retitled to?
I would love to have somebody to help me. But there's a big BUT! Rails is not
the fire&forget type of packages, so you need to commit to support the packages
for a longer time.
> It only means that it's not that simple. Please talk to Ondrej to see
> what needs to be done, and how you can help.
If you are really interested in helping with rails, then I have a great task
for you :). I have a couple of CVEs pending to be applied for rails-2.3
in stable and oldstable. It would be great if you can help me preparing
the security upload - means cherry-picking the needed patches, adding
them to the git repository and at least a basic testing if the applications
depending on rails in the stable works.
After that I would suggest packaging 3.1.rc8 as ruby-<gemname>-3.1
and uploading to experimental. You should also check the ruby-<gemname>-2.3
packages in the pkg-ruby-extras git tree. And (!) you should double check
your packages before asking for upload, I have found at least three
errors in your package:
- debian/docs: README.rdoc not installed
- debian/copyright: License not indented
- debian/control: missing dependencies (gem2deb correctly added a
comment line); not versioned dependencies, you need to match the rails
gems versions - check the ruby-active*-2.3 packages for control.in ->
control generation in debian/rules
> From now on, I will only sponsor new packages (not already in Debian)
> if the requester has done some of the "collective" tasks listed on
> that page. I don't think that it's a too hard policy: handling new
> upstream releases is generally quite easy, for example.
The applies for rails-* as well. My workload is already something between
150%-200% and I really don't need more packages uploaded by DD or DM
who lost interest in maintaining them in few weeks. (Please don't take this
personally this is really a generic observation from an old fart^H^H^H^H
Debian Developer. Happened to me with some packages as well.)
O.
--
Ondřej Surý <ondrej@sury.org>
Reply to: