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

Bug#840295: marked as done (Requesting RC exception for stretch for browserified javascript)

Your message dated Fri, 3 Feb 2017 23:41:45 +0100
with message-id <cc90bad4-2278-9edb-54b1-28844a5f690d@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#840295: Requesting RC exception for stretch for browserified javascript
has caused the Debian Bug report #840295,
regarding Requesting RC exception for stretch for browserified javascript
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
840295: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=840295
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
package: release.debian.org

Dear Release Team,

As discussed with FTP masters[1], I'd like to request an RC exception
for browserified javascript packages already in the archive.

Hopefully we'll be able to complete a proper browserification
environment in debian for stretch+1 release.

Thanks
Praveen

[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=839801#15

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On 18/10/16 06:20, Pirate Praveen wrote:
> On Tuesday 18 October 2016 12:32 AM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>> Hi Pirate,
>>
>> On 10/10/16 11:57, Pirate Praveen wrote:
>>> package: release.debian.org
>>>
>>> Dear Release Team,
>>>
>>> As discussed with FTP masters[1], I'd like to request an RC exception
>>> for browserified javascript packages already in the archive.
>>
>> Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't seen any replies to the questions
>> you've got. I'm not sure what I'll think when you do that, but at the moment
>> this is a nack from me. Packages can still go into contrib if the build tools
>> can't get ready in time for the release, and then for buster (stretch+1) they
>> could move to main.
> 
> I was waiting for jison packaging to complete, so the discussion can
> focus on the browserify part. jison is not accepted in main. I'll reply
> to those questions now.
> 
>> Another question is what build tools are we missing at this point? I have seen
>> some mentioned in the tech-ctte thread. Mostly grunt, which is ITP #673727. The
>> main problem there seems to be that jshint is non-free, but it seems[1] that it
>> can be made optional. Is that not the case? Are there other blockers, aside from
>> packaging the rdeps[2]? It'd be good to know what we are missing to get these
>> javascript packages buildable in main, and what is blocking those from entering
>> the archive.
> 
> jison was blocking libjs-handlebars, which is now packaged. Now only
> grunt is blocking. The huge number of dependencies is the only issue
> with grunt. We are crowd funding to work full time for a month to get
> this packaged -> http://igg.me/at/debian-browserify. We have already
> completed 30+ dependencies in last 3-4 days. If we cannot complete grunt
> for jessie, then only we need to consider the exception.

I'm sorry but I'm declining this request. You'll have to do the necessary job to
be able to build your packages from source, like every other Debian package.
Granting an exception for new stuff is not something I'm happy with, and sets a
precedent I don't want to set.

Cheers,
Emilio

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


--- End Message ---
Reply to: