[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Looking for sponsoring/menthoring : openmeca package [ITP: #850590]



Le 2017-01-17 10:41, Mattia Rizzolo a écrit :
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 10:27:45AM +0100, dada wrote:
** What I have already done for packaging openmeca **

 - open an ITP (see
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=850590).
Andreas Tille (from debian-science) tell me that the soft fit well with
the debian-science field.

good.

 - open a git repository for openmeca on alioth :

https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/debian-science/packages/openmeca.git/
post a first version of the openmeca package on this git repository. This package seems to be right on my personal computer (Ubuntu 16.04.1
LTS and checked with "gbp buildpackage")

good.  (although you really should build it in Debian unstable, and
test it there too).

 - post an intent on the debian science list (see
https://lists.debian.org/debian-science/2017/01/msg00093.html)
   but I have no answer.

That's not an "intent" really, it's a forward of your ITP with "some"
added text.

As I have no answer from the debian-science list (probably they have no
time), I post my request on this list.

1) consider that 4 days are really little, also considering a week end
   was in the middle
2) the subject was really poor: most of use receive *a lot* of emails
and subjects are important; I probably skipped that email thinking it
   was just a "FYI" of an ITP related to -science.

I am not used with the Debian policy so... please tell me if I am wrong,
impatient, or something else....

The usual procedure (especially if the team have nothing else in place)
is to open a RFS bug.  I invite you to read
https://mentors.debian.net/intro-maintainers especially from point 5
onward; mentors.d.n also gives you a template for the RFS bug (see point
4). (note that even if you'll have to upload a source packages to
mentors.d.n, several of us still prefer to review using a git
repository, so please include that too in the request).
The reason to prefer an RFS bug over emails is that they don't get lost: several of us look at https://bugs.debian.org/sponsorship-requests from
time to time and take care of pending request, whereas emails in a
mailing list are much harder to keep track of.





Hello Matia, Thank you for your detailed and quick reply.
I am going to : 1) wait and 2) read the intro-maintainers.

Now, you don't have any package already in the archive, so my personal policy (https://people.debian.org/~mattia/sponsoring.html) "forbids" me
to sponsoring the package, but I trust there are several other
developers willing to do so :)  I just wanted to explain better the
usual procedure ^^

I understand your position for sponsoring, no problem !
Best regards, Damien.


Reply to: