Re: Orphaning of gutenprint
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 11:49:49PM +0100, Till Kamppeter wrote:
> On 01/02/2012 04:59 PM, Didier Raboud wrote:
> >Till: would you consider maintaining gutenprint together with me in Debian,
> >assuming that we could reach a reasonable agreement on the current Ubuntu
> >diff? I think that maintaining everything in "Debian first" (or at least
> >keeping the diff as minimal as possible) would help bring slightly more
> >manpower to that area.
>
> I could do this, by continuing maintainership of the Ubuntu package
> but making the same package available for Debian. For this a version
> control repository (like for HPLIP and Foomatic) needs to be created
> to maintain the packaging for both distros.
You must surely be aware that such a repository has existed for years?
It's in the Vcs-Git lines in debian/control.
> The Debian and Ubuntu
> packages have a bigger delta, the Ubuntu package having a better
> maintainability and containing all special printer-driver-ppackaging
> features like automatic PPD update, compressed PPDs, ... So I would
> replace the old Debian package by the Ubuntu package in Debian and
> this way continue with tyhe Ubuntu and Debian packages being
> identical (as HPLIP and Foomatic are).
These extra PPDs were not included in Debian for a reason: they are
entirely pointless with modern CUPS.
We no longer provide PPDs under /usr/share/ppd; they get dynamically
generated by CUPS. They waste inordinate amounts of disc space, and
those patches were reverted a good while back.
The Ubuntu package needs to sync properly with the Debian one; it's
still got piles of cruft in it which were removed in Debian some time
back.
Comments on the current delta. The Ubuntu-provided deltas are
horrible, so not all comments may apply to the source package; they
may just be artifacts from the diff.
5.2.7-2/configure
5.2.7-2/configure.ac
Both obsolete and were reverted in Debian.
5.2.7-2/debian/changelog
OK
5.2.7-2/debian/control
Build-Dep changes not needed unless you want to provide megabytes of
PPDs which won't be used.
Transitional cupsys-driver-gutenprint needs removing.
Missing ${perl:Depends}
Creation of ijsgutenprint PPDs (Why?!)
5.2.7-2/debian/cups-driver-gutenprint.debhelper.log
Should not be in diff--dirty tree?
5.2.7-2/debian/cups-driver-gutenprint.install.in
apport is not in Debian.
Some odd path changes.
5.2.7-2/debian/cups-driver-gutenprint.postinst
Changes are redundant due to upgrade logic being removed.
5.2.7-2/debian/cupsys-driver-gutenprint.debhelper.log
Should not be in diff--dirty tree?
5.2.7-2/debian/escputil.debhelper.log
Should not be in diff--dirty tree?
5.2.7-2/debian/foomatic-db-gutenprint.debhelper.log
Should not be in diff--dirty tree?
5.2.7-2/debian/foomatic-db-gutenprint.ppd-updater
Needed?
5.2.7-2/debian/gimp-gutenprint.debhelper.log
Should not be in diff--dirty tree?
5.2.7-2/debian/gutenprint-doc.debhelper.log
Should not be in diff--dirty tree?
5.2.7-2/debian/gutenprint-locales.debhelper.log
Should not be in diff--dirty tree?
5.2.7-2/debian/ijsgutenprint.debhelper.log
Should not be in diff--dirty tree?
5.2.7-2/debian/ijsgutenprint-ppds.debhelper.log
Should not be in diff--dirty tree?
5.2.7-2/debian/ijsgutenprint-ppds.ppd-updater
Needed?
5.2.7-2/debian/libgutenprint2.debhelper.log
5.2.7-2/debian/libgutenprint-dev.debhelper.log
Should not be in diff--dirty tree?
5.2.7-2/debian/libgutenprint-doc.debhelper.log
Should not be in diff--dirty tree?
5.2.7-2/debian/libgutenprintui2-1.debhelper.log
Should not be in diff--dirty tree?
5.2.7-2/debian/libgutenprintui2-dev.debhelper.log
Should not be in diff--dirty tree?
5.2.7-2/debian/local/apport-hook.py
5.2.7-2/debian/patches/cups-1.5-compatibility.patch
Not needed at present.
5.2.7-2/debian/patches/cups_modeldir.patch
Obsoleted, reverted.
5.2.7-2/debian/patches/debian-changes-5.2.7-1
Cruft.
5.2.7-2/debian/patches/generic-large-format-printers.patch
OK. Merged upstream?
5.2.7-2/debian/patches/no-data-dumper-needed.patch
OK. Merged upstream?
5.2.7-2/debian/patches/series
OK.
5.2.7-2/debian/patches/upgrade-getopt.patch
What on earth would a tool only used by the postinst need long
options for? Merged upstream?
5.2.7-2/debian/patches/use-dnointerpolate-in-ghostscript-command-lines.patch
Why disable interpolation? Does this have a noticable effect on
image quality? Merged upstream?
5.2.7-2/debian/rules
All redundant AFAICT.
5.2.7-2/man/cups-genppdupdate.8.in
Obsoleted, reverted.
5.2.7-2/.pc/applied-patches
5.2.7-2/.pc/cups-1.5-compatibility.patch/src/cups/commandtocanon.c
5.2.7-2/.pc/cups-1.5-compatibility.patch/src/cups/commandtoepson.c
5.2.7-2/.pc/cups-1.5-compatibility.patch/src/cups/genppd.c
5.2.7-2/.pc/cups_modeldir.patch/configure
5.2.7-2/.pc/cups_modeldir.patch/configure.ac
5.2.7-2/.pc/cups_modeldir.patch/man/cups-genppdupdate.8.in
5.2.7-2/.pc/cups_modeldir.patch/README
5.2.7-2/.pc/cups_modeldir.patch/src/cups/cups-genppdupdate.in
5.2.7-2/.pc/cups_modeldir.patch/src/cups/Makefile.am
5.2.7-2/.pc/cups_modeldir.patch/src/cups/Makefile.in
5.2.7-2/.pc/debian-changes-5.2.7-1/scripts/config.guess
5.2.7-2/.pc/generic-large-format-printers.patch/src/xml/printers.xml
5.2.7-2/.pc/no-data-dumper-needed.patch/src/foomatic/foomatic-generator.in
5.2.7-2/.pc/upgrade-getopt.patch/src/cups/cups-genppdupdate.in
5.2.7-2/.pc/use-dnointerpolate-in-ghostscript-command-lines.patch/src/foomatic/foomatic-templates-ijs/gutenprint.xml
All of these should be absent from the source package.
5.2.7-2/README
Obsoleted, reverted.
5.2.7-2/scripts/config.guess
5.2.7-2/src/cups/commandtocanon.c
5.2.7-2/src/cups/commandtoepson.c
5.2.7-2/src/cups/cups-genppdupdate.in
5.2.7-2/src/cups/genppd.c
5.2.7-2/src/cups/Makefile.am
5.2.7-2/src/cups/Makefile.in
5.2.7-2/src/foomatic/foomatic-generator.in
5.2.7-2/src/foomatic/foomatic-templates-ijs/gutenprint.xml
5.2.7-2/src/xml/printers.xml
All derived from applied patches commented on above.
I do worry about the delta between Debian and Ubuntu, and not because
Debian is missing a needed patch from Ubuntu, but because the Ubuntu
patch contains tons of cruft. We intentionally maintain close parity
with upstream, and are reluctant to diverge without good reason. I
have to say, I would be rather unhappy if the existing Ubuntu patchset
were merged given that the majority of it is entirely unnecessary.
About the only patch I would seriously consider merging is
debian/patches/generic-large-format-printers.patch, and even this
can be dropped when 5.2.8 is released next week (I hope this is
already upstream, right?).
Sorry to be blunt, but the quality of the Ubuntu package is lacking.
Till, if you're going to work on it in Debian, then I also would
expect better as well. The Debian package *cannot* be a dumping
ground for any and all Ubuntu changes. "Replacing" the Debian
packages with the Ubuntu ones is not an option. Maintaining the
Ubuntu-specific changes on a separate branch would certainly be.
Regards,
Roger
--
.''`. Roger Leigh
: :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/
`. `' Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/
`- GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848 Please GPG sign your mail.
Reply to: