Re: Bug#629125: New version 0.29-1 of ensymble (fixes: #616799, #629125)
Hi Debian Release,
A small summary of current situation:
- ensymble is in RFA since Jan 2011 (#611552)
- ensymble upstream released 0.29 in May 2010
(http://code.google.com/p/ensymble/downloads/list)
- new upstream 0.29 also fixes #629125
- debian currently has 0.28-2 in sid and wheezy
- 0.28-2 uses the deprecated py_central (#616799)
- Dominic has made most of the work for the preparation of 0.29-1 and
published it in a git repo
- I cloned his repo and provided a fix for #616799 targeting for 0.29-1
- I am not a DD or DM, nor do I have the time to adopt ensymble (but I
would like to see 0.29 in wheezy)
Please also see comments below and advice on the preferred course of action.
2012/10/7 Dominic Hargreaves <dom@earth.li>:
> On Sat, Oct 06, 2012 at 08:25:43PM +0300, Eddy Petrișor wrote:
>
>> Attached there is a complete 0.29-1 package version based on Dominic's master
>> version from his git repo, with the necessary changes made to fix bug #616799
>> (python-central is deprecated) and the bug #629125 (sha module is deprecated).
>
> Thanks! The 0.28 branch in git should probably be merged (at least the
> changelog) before upload.
I merged it. There were no changes in the packaging except:
- merged the 0.28-2 changelog entry
- the X-Python-Version changed from 2.6 (as on master) to all (as on
0.28-2 - the version from sid)
- The debian/ensymble.links file in 0.28-2 was removed since there is
no /usr/share/ensymble/cmdmain.py anymore
>> These changes can be pulled from my git repo of ensymble (based on
>> Dominic's repo):
>> http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=users/eddyp-guest/ensymble.git
>>
>>
>> The package ensymbe is alreaby in RFA state for some time (#611552), he already
>> pre-approved a NMU for this version, as seen from his personal repo in the
>> master branch:
>>
>> http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=users/dom/ensymble.git;a=blob;f=debian/changelog;h=bffeebf79a250b500fc1b319d2267db78e5d17b8;hb=master
>
> For the avoidance of doubt, the file you've pointed to does not
> pre-approve any NMU; "Acknowledge NMU" means that the maintainer has
> noticed a *previous* NMU. However I do not object to another NMU if
> someone feels that's appropriate.
Oh, my bad. It's been so much time since I've worked in Debian that I
forgot these things. I am sorry if I seemed pushy or rude with my
misunderstanding.
> I cannot promise any timescale for reviewing/applying these changes,
> so an NMU is absolutely fine, but please let me if you (generic) plan on
> doing so. I will keep this on my radar in the meantime.
I am not a DD nor a DM, so I don't have any upload rights. I was
hoping somebody with such rights would sponsor the upload.
Not sure if debian-release has an attachment size-based filter, so
I'll send the updated package to the BRs in a separate mail to make
sure the message arrives in debian-release.
>> So, in my opinion, this new version can be uploaded to the archive to ease up
>> the deprecation of python-central. If release managers think a new upstream
>> version is too much, maybe it can be blocked from transitioning, until the new
>> version gets enough testing in sid.
>>
>> If you think a 0.28 version should be provided, please tell me, so I
>> can provide a version based on 0.28.
>
> If you would like to see these changes in wheezy I recommend that you
> talk directly to the release team (please CC these bugs).
Added debian-release in CC.
Release team, is a new upstream version appropriate, taking into
account the following?
- the upstream version was released in 2010 (no other releases since then),
- and the new version also fixes #629125
If not, do you advice for a 0.28-3 version with only the fix for the
py_central deprecation (and maybe a patch for 629125)?
>> You can pull my changes if you add my repo as a remote then pull and merge.
>>
>> git remote add -f eddy git://anonscm.debian.org/users/eddyp-guest/ensymble.git
>> git co upstream && git merge eddy/upstream
>> git co pristine-tar && git merge eddy/pristine-tar
>> git checkout master && git merge eddy/master
>>
>>
>> I also fixed the layout of the files in the upstream branch which
>> should contain what was in 'upsteam/current'. (it seems in the SVN to
>> git transition the different upstream branches were not treated as
>> such, but the entire upstream directory was considered a single
>> branch).
>
> Thanks :)
NP. The new changes are published in my repo.
>> P.S.: I added myself to Uploaders, but I am not sure if this is
>> necessary since I don't intend to take over the package myself (and I
>> forgot some of the packaging stuff I once knew). If this is wrong,
>> please remove the line.
>
> It sounds like it shouldn't be there then.
Removed.
--
Regards,
EddyP
=============================================
The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human
ambition. - Carl Sagan
Reply to: