Re: Two astronomy-related RFSes up for sponsoring (since 2 months)
Dear Andreas,
Le 25/06/12 17:58, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> Hi Thibaut,
>
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 11:58:26AM +0200, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
>> I have sent these two RFS a little bit more than two months ago.
>
> I'm afraid that these packages will not make it any more into Wheezy
> because the new queue will not be processed until the Freeze date - at
> least this is the information I have.
I realize it may be too late for Wheezy already. I just _had_ to try one
last time :-)
> But finally you did not really
> wasted your time - Debian development is not really a discrete step from
> release to release but a continuous flow.
Certainly, having those packages around even if not in the official
repository or in the next release is already valuable :-)
>> yp-svipc: System V InterProcess Communication
> I uploaded this package to the new queue because I think it is OK.
>
> The only issue I have that as always I wonder why the package is not yet
> mentioned in the astronomy(-dev ??) task of Debian Science. Could you
> please suggest reasonable task(s) for the binary packages of this source
> package?
Ideally yorick-svipc should be listed as a dependency of yorick-full, in
the astronomy task. But doing that before yp-svipc enters unstable would
render yorick-full uninstallable... I don't understand how tasks work,
is it harmless to include a package which is not yet in testing (or even
not in the archive at all)?
>> gyoto: General relativistic geodesic integration and ray-tracing
> I added to the package a debian/upstream file featuring citation
> information when I have seen flashing a hint about a publication when
> watching at the build log. As a general note: Please do upstream and
> your users a favour and add citation information if there are scientific
> publications about packages available. It really helps strengthening
> Debian inside the scientific community.
Thanks, good point.
> Moreover I do see some room for enhancement for this package. I wonder
> whether you have some reason to stick to debhelper 7 for this package
> (may be some backporting plan might rectify this). However, even dh 7
> knows short debhelper notation which makes team maintenance way more
> easy. Would you consider changing this? I would not insist on this as
> a condition for sponsering but I'd really recommend it.
I'm guessing this is mostly because I started packaging gyoto a long
time ago, before I understood enough of the dh shorthand to feel
confident using it. Not sure I'll have time for this conversion this
week (but as you said, this package is unlikely to reach wheezy anyway,
I'll push it into backports soon enough).
> What I really like you to do is to remove the dh-make template (except
> if Joey Hess and Craig Small did really worked on this very package
> ;-).)
Ok, I'll do that tomorrow :-)
> I decided to add gyoto to the astronomy task - please confirm that this is
> all what should be added or whether possibly libgyoto0-dev would be a
> good thing for astronomy-dev (or whatever)
Yes, I would put libgyoto0-dev in astronomy-dev, gyoto in astronomy, and
at some point add yorick-gyoto to yorick-full.
>
>> I'd be really, really grateful if someone from the community would have
>> a look.
>
> Hope this helps you a bit while I'm on Debian Science meeting in Grenoble. :-)
Yes, that helps a lot :-)
> Kind regards
>
> Andreas.
>
Regards, Thibaut
Reply to: