done (for now) / Re: RFS: request for upload for several packages (frog,timbl,ucto)
Hi Maarten,
Just uploaded libfolia_2.21-1_amd64.changes . Please fix this:
Now running lintian libfolia_2.21-1_amd64.changes ...
W: libfolia source: superfluous-file-pattern m4/ax_pthread.m4 [debian/copyright:29]
W: libfolia source: superfluous-file-pattern m4/pkg.m4 [debian/copyright:25]
Finished running lintian.
before the next upload. Thanks for your work!
Bye,
Joost
PS: I believe all uploads of other packages will get properly built now. I am
not quite sure if a source-only upload of libfolia and ticcutils is needed once
these 2 get through NEW; we'll find out in due time...
On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 08:11:50PM +0100, Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote:
> For the record: I'm in touch with upstream about an issue with libfolia:
>
> пет 24 19:56 < joostvb> gbp:error: Cannot find pristine tar commit for archive
> 'libfolia_2.21.orig.tar.gz'
> [20:09] [joostvb(+i)] [34:MeukNet/#lst(+nt)]
>
> Bye,
>
> Joost
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 07:10:43PM +0100, Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote:
> > Hi Maarten,
> >
> > just did:
> >
> > joostvb@agni:~/git/opaque-store% dupload --to anonymous-ftp-master ../build-area/ticcutils_0.36-1_source.changes
> >
> > no time for libfolia now.
> >
> > HTH!
> >
> > Bye,
> >
> > Joost
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 03:57:17PM +0100, Maarten van Gompel wrote:
> > > Hi Andreas et al,
> > >
> > > Here's another update on this: it got pointed out to me that I had
> > > actual upload rights for my packages and might not need a sponsor after
> > > all (I'm in https://ftp-master.debian.org/dm.txt). So I prepared all the
> > > packages again and ran dupload on them.
> > >
> > > That seemed to go well, except I now got two rejections:
> > >
> > > ticcutils_0.36-1_source.changes REJECTED
> > > ACL dm: NEW uploads are not allowed
> > > binary:libticcutils10 is NEW.
> > >
> > > libfolia_2.21-1_source.changes REJECTED
> > > ACL dm: NEW uploads are not allowed
> > > binary:folialint is NEW.
> > > binary:libfolia22 is NEW.
> > >
> > > All other packages got ACCEPTED (however, they rely on the rejected ones
> > > so things won't work).
> > >
> > > The package counts as new because of the SO-bump we did, but it seems I
> > > don't have the permissions to upload that? I don't really know how to proceed
> > > now anymore...
> > >
> > > >> Since these packages are depending from the first one I did not
> > > >> continued. If you want to do your final sponsor a favour please
> > > >> set the target distribution of those packages to "UNRELEASED" again
> > >
> > > > Done, I reverted them to UNRELEASED and updated them (there was no
> > > > routine-update in debian testing though, so I did it manually)
> > >
> > > I had reverted the reversion again (can you still follow? they're back
> > > to 'unstable' because I released them now). All 'debian/*' git tags are
> > > also set and pushed now.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Maarten van Gompel
> > > Digital Infrastructure, Humanities Cluster,
> > > Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen (KNAW)
> > >
> > > web: https://proycon.anaproy.nl
> > > gpg: 0x39FE11201A31555C
> >
> >
>
Reply to:
- References:
- RFS: request for upload for several packages (frog,timbl,ucto)
- From: "Maarten van Gompel" <proycon@anaproy.nl>
- Re: RFS: request for upload for several packages (frog,timbl,ucto)
- From: Andreas Tille <tille@debian.org>
- Re: RFS: request for upload for several packages (frog,timbl,ucto)
- From: "Maarten van Gompel" <proycon@anaproy.nl>
- Re: RFS: request for upload for several packages (frog,timbl,ucto)
- From: "Maarten van Gompel" <proycon@anaproy.nl>
- Re: RFS: request for upload for several packages (frog,timbl,ucto)
- From: Joost van Baal-Ilić <joostvb-debian@mdcc.cx>
- Re: RFS: request for upload for several packages (frog,timbl,ucto)
- From: Joost van Baal-Ilić <joostvb-debian@mdcc.cx>