Re: How to properly integrate cran2deb into Debian?
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 07:25:10AM -0600, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> I just wanted to state that I have never in the past nor in the present
> suggested to use cran2deb to insert a large number of packages---currently
> 2800 at CRAN and growing at a 40% yearly growth rate---into Debian.
To make ma intend more clear. I do NOT want to include any random CRAN
package created by cran2deb into official Debian "just because it
works" (in case it wourl work). My intention would be rather to cherry
pick those packages which are of interest for some reason. The strongest
indication that there is some interest would be that the package is just
included in Debian.
The process to update *these* packages could probably be automated because
the critical detail - the copyright - is just there. Perhaps there is some
issue in keeping the changelog (I admit I did not dived into cran2deb to
learn about how this is handled).
The advantage would be that the package is quite probably up to date
with less hassle and on the other hand we could keep an Uploaders field
where you always can contact a maintainer who (formerly) was responsible
for the packaging.
This way the current Debian maintainer of the package might safe some
time to keep on cherry picking for other *selected* CRAN packages which
will not bloat the archive as much as the 2000+x CRAN packages which is
definitely not needed.
> If memory serves, the NEW Queue maintainer just complained about 300 packages
> waiting and too few people helping. I think there is a __a lot__ of work
> involved in getting the archive, builder, bug system, ... going. Adding
> 2800+ packages which are, for a very large part, pretty fringe, is not going
> to be a smart idea.
I do not think that I asked for adding 2800+ packages to NEW queue.
> Additional cran2deb resources would be good. It has been leaning on Charles
> alone for too. I think I speak for Charles when I say that our vision always
> was to get cran2deb "up and running" as a "test repository" and gather
> experience running it. One could then analyses popular packages (or clusters
> thereof) and insert those, provided some maintainer (or groups) stand behind
Ahhh, same idea - different wording. Fine. :-)
> Talking to ftp maintainer as Manuel suggested is definitely a good
> idea too, or even imperative.
> I won't have much to add to the discussion so please feel free to drop the CCs.
I kept CC for the moment because it seemed to need clarification.