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

Re: dh-r changes (Was: A common group on salsa.debian.org for R packages ?)

On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 11:27:30AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 08:42:45AM +0100, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> > > I'd vote for anonscm style even
> > > if we need to change all Vcs fields anyway due to the team change.
> > 
> > Unless we change the minds of Salsa/Alioth admins and convince them to keep
> > anonscm.d.o forever, I think this is a bad idea. Because that means we'll have
> > to go through another round of Vcs-* updates when the anonscm.d.o alias is
> > disabled.
> Do you hold the bet that also salsa will not stay for ever?  So we
> really *need* to change the mind of the admins and I feel in a user
> position who has some feature request which is shared by lots of other
> users and should be fullfilled by the admins.

Sure, I agree with you in principle.

However, from a technical point of view, there is not only the problem of the
hostname, but also of the access path of the repositories on that host. And
even though the AliothRewriter thing provides a partial solution to the
problem, it is not enough, because URLs such as
https//anonscm.d.o/r-pkg-team/$pkg do not currently work.

> > Please rather talk to the people who make the decision. 
> I did so on debian-devel and what I wanted to express here is that I do
> not consider it a good idea if we would now start using salsa in Vcs
> fields only to learn later that anonscm will be fine (which I'm
> positively expecting).  As I said previously:  anonscm was inventend to
> stop the need to change Vcs URLs every second release (and it was really
> that much and will never stop if we now start using salsa).

I am ok with keeping for some time the old URLs with anonscm.d.o for existing
packages, since the AliothRewriter makes them work. Once a final decision is
made about the future of anonscm.d.o, we can update them accordingly.

However note that we have a difficulty for new packages. Suppose that you
introduce a new r-cran-foo package, what URL are you going to use? The only one
that will be functional will be on salsa.d.o. Of course you can introduce a
fake rule in the AliothRewriter, pretending there was previously a repository
for that package on Alioth, but this is rather awkward, and I am not sure this
will be accepted.

> What we also need to clarify is the Maintainer field of r-pkg-team
> maintained packages.  I'm about to team hijack r-cran-xts[1] and for
> the moment I used
>    Maintainer: Debian Science Team <debian-science-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org>
> but we should use an own list - and one that is promising to persist the
> alioth shutdown.

I agree with you, we should use a separate list. There are two possibilities:
an official list (like debian-r@lists.debian.org), or a team email alias on
tracker.d.o (not yet implemented, but Raphaël Hertzog said on -devel@ that he
is working on that feature).


⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀  Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀  http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀  http://www.debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: