Re: State of the transition to the new Ruby policy
On 20/04/12 at 00:19 +0200, Cédric Boutillier wrote:
> Dear Release Team,
>
> Since the beginning of the development cycle for Wheezy [0], the Ruby
> team has been working on several big changes in the Ruby policy for a
> better support of several versions of the interpreter and improvement of
> the global quality of Ruby packages.
>
> 0: http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/blog/?p=681
>
> The packaging rules are described on a dedicated Wiki page [1] and in a
> draft of the Ruby policy [2].
>
> 1: http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Ruby/Packaging
>
> 2: http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-ruby-extras/ruby-policy.git;=summary
>
> The Ruby team has been putting a lot of effort [3] during this
> development cycle to convert the packages they maintain to this new
> policy (270+ packages).
>
> 3: http://pkg-ruby-extras.alioth.debian.org/wheezy/
>
> Unfortunately, many packages not maintained by the team still follow the
> now obsolete policy used for Squeeze. It is vital that the transition
> finishes before the release of Wheezy, in order to ensure coherence in
> the installation and use of the Ruby libraries and applications in the
> stable release. In order to talk the maintainers of these packages into
> converting them to the new policy, we want to send an email to
> debian-devel-announce@l.d.o with the content below.
>
> However, in case the transition is not completely finished for the
> freeze, could you suggest ways in which the team can act? Is it
> conceivable to add the end of the Ruby transition as a release goal?
> Would it be OK to consider Ruby packages that have not transitioned as
> NMU-able in order to make them comply to the new policy? On the other
> hand, transitioning a packaging is quite invasive (e.g. most of the time it
> includes renaming both source and binary packages), so perhaps you may
> have other suggestions.
Hi,
I feel really bad about commenting on this so late. Still, better late
than never. :)
Have all maintainers/co-maintainers of packages that still need to be
transitioned already been contacted? You could write a UDD query that
extracts all relevant emails, and then send them a nice mail, proposing
your help and pointing to the relevant docs. (I can help with the UDD
query if needed. Or you could simply use dd-list to generate the list.)
Then, I think that you should define a strategy and just start working
on the packages, possibly using the DELAYED+14 queue. I can identify
some of the maintainers as being inactive in Debian. Some others are
very active but not usually doing Ruby stuff. Finally, some others are
also active members of the team. And some packages could probably be
removed. Maybe working on a per-maintainer basis rather than on a
per-package basis would be helpful to build a communication channel.
Lucas
Reply to: