Frederic Lehobey wrote:
Hi, Thanks Jordan for your notification. On Sat, Jan 07, 2006 at 10:21:17AM -0800, Jordan Mantha wrote:Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:To be honest, I package for Ubuntu because it is the distro I use. I don't run Debian (although maybe I should) so I would feel awkward about packaging something for a distro that I don't even run. Now, maybe that is my fault but I am encouraging Ubuntu packagers to go ahead and file ITPs or RFPs and find sponsors.-- Lastly as the one behind Quantian, the to my knowledge single largest collection of scientific / numerical / quantitative apps in one ready-to-run place, I'd love to pull the two resources in and get, say, the more polished desktop experience and menu organisation of (K)Ubuntuback into Debian / Knoppix / Quantian, and would also love to pull some ofthe additional packages in. But I am * still puzzled about the binary interchangeability, or lack thereof, between Ubuntu and Debian * confused as to why one would want to insert a package into Ubuntu but not Debian (other than the needing a DD sponsor reason).This puzzled me. Is not packaging for Debian or for Ubuntu *exactly* the same thing (technically speaking)? What about https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ContributingToDebian ?
The irc discussion that led to the writing of https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ContributingToDebian also led me to start this thread. It is exactly what I am trying to do even though it isn't necessarily simple for me because I did not come to Ubuntu from Debian.
From my perspective (I am just a beginning packager and not a MOTU or DD) packaging for Debian and Ubuntu are very similar but not exactly the same(technically speaking). For instance, gcc 4.0 and python 2.4 sometimes will lead to a patch in Ubuntu that wouldn't necessarily be in sid (yet) but hopefully when sid moves to gcc 4.0 and python 2.4 (maybe it has already) then DDs can use those Ubuntu patches. But one point that I would like to make is that packaging is not completely a technical process. There is a large social component to it as well in the sense that you have to interact with sponsors to get your package included into your distro and you need to communicate with other packagers that will effect your package and you need to communicate with the users of your package when the find bugs. To be honest, for me this is not trivial and learning how to do these things takes time and effort and I find it difficult enough that I initially didn't want to do it for both Ubuntu and Debian and since I am an Ubuntu user and now interact primarily with Ubuntu devs it is logical for me to use Ubuntu's tools (REVU, ubuntu- mailing lists, and the Malone bug tracking system). Now that I have somewhat of a handle on these I am trying to get into the Debian process (ITPs, debian-mentors, BTS, etc.) so that I can properly maintain my package in Debian as well because I feel like giving back to the Debian community is the right thing to do.
Moreover, testimonies like this one (in French) http://thomas.enix.org/Blog-20050907205353-Libre show it is `easy' (using a chroot) to build Ubuntu packages from the working Debian ones. Doing it the other way (Ubuntu only packages not existing in Debian) requires additional work like the one performed by the utnubu team. So this advocates a lot to my eyes creating packages for Debian from the start (this way we all benefit from the new packages).
I agree that it is easier (currently) for packages to flow from Debian to Ubuntu than from Ubuntu to Debian. I think this is probably the case for just about any derivative distro. However, I do think that Ubuntu is trying to work in this. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ContributingToDebian is a great example. I agree that from a technical perspective it makes sense to package for Debian and then make changes in Ubuntu only if necessary. But again, from an Ubuntu users perspective I feel like I have to learn 2 distros to package for Debian but I can package for the one I use and know and maybe somewhere along the line it can get back to Debian. Now, if I care that it makes it to Debian (which I do) then I will be motivated to take the time to learn Debian's way of sponsoring packages, etc. In the future, as I learn more and more about Debian I will probably start packaging for Debian more directly, although I will still probably REVU to get feedback on my packaging. I think as Ubuntu and it's packagers mature you will find more and more people doing that.
I agree. That is why I started this discussion. For me it comes down to this, we have Debian users who will want to package/patch for Debian and Ubuntu users who will want to package/patch for Ubuntu and what we needI really don't want to be confrontational, or start another useless flame war. But given Debian and debian-science, how can we achieve the best outcomes with the least amount of duplication and waste?Well, what I understand currently is that people who package/patch for Debian are de facto packaging/patching for Ubuntu also in the same time, aren't they? The other way in not yet automatic.
That is mostly true, except that there are times when Ubuntu needs to add patches to make things work in Ubuntu but we try to minimize the differences. There are automatically created patches that DDs can use at http://people.ubuntu.com/~scott/patches/ . I am not totally sure how complete or useful they are (I have never had to use them) but an example of trying to get the Ubuntu work back to Debian.
is for the Ubuntu packages/patches to get make it into Debian because that is good for everybody. I wanted debian-science to be aware of what we are doing over in Ubuntu so that we can communicate/coordinate as needed to avoid duplication of work and make sure that we are giving Debian/Ubuntu users the best distros we can.Would the following proposal I made (without much success) some months ago fulfil some of your wishes? http://lists.debian.org/debian-science/2005/08/msg00166.html
You proposal would indeed make it easier I believe for Ubuntu packagers to get there stuff into Debian. I can't comment on it's feasibility since that would have to be more commitment on the Debian end. For me at the moment it is sufficient that if I package a scientific app for Ubuntu I at least tell debian-science and hopefully file and ITP and get a sponsor so that it goes into Debian. That should hopefully eliminate duplication of work. There may be more long-term solutions but I don't think we are in a terrible state as it is. On the Ubuntu end I think we just need to get better at letting Debian know what we are doing. I am personally trying to do this and I am encouraging my fellow Ubuntu packagers to do the same.
Best regards, Frederic
Thanks for your comments, Jordan