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

Bug#323353: [Fwd: Re: Bug#323353: jwm: 0.23 has been packaged. A sample *.deb available]

Apparently, both addresses were rejected by your mail server.

-- 
David Moreno Garza <damog@debian.org> | http://www.damog.net/
 GPG: C671257D - 6EF6 C284 C95D 78F6 0B78 FFD3 981C 5FD7 C671 257D
 Signed mail welcome. Encrypted mail preferred.
--- Begin Message --- 
On Sun, 2005-08-21 at 11:56 +0300, Jari Aalto wrote: 
> | > We can change that when you feel the package is ready. 
> | Alright, bear that in mind.
> 
> Sure. I just read the mentors list that it is not necessary
> to start with "-1" when package is included in Debian.
> We can make it read "-2". See
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2005/08/msg00109.html

Yes, I know. That's why it was a personal approach to package quality
packages. Please think as a normal user: What's wrong when he has 1.2-3
package and suddenly, while updating, he upgrades to 1.2-6 and the next
day 1.2-10. Use the normal revision sequence. Whenever you don't do it
on an official Debian package, God kills a puppy.

> There is this in the changelog:
> 
>   * Initial release. Closes: #323353 (WNPP RFP; retitled ITP)
> 
> But naturally it the line must be moved to the "current" N.NN-2"
> changelog entry when the package is ready. Was this what you
> looked after?

Yes. No. Kind of.

Your Closes: command is on changelog entry 0.23-1.1. Your last entry is
0.23-1.11. The package will be built using this last version and apply
changes made on this. In that way, your bug will not be closed if I
upload the package with that scheme on debian/changelog. Am I being
myself clear?

> So, should I send this in addition to previous 'retitle'?
> 
>     package wnpp
>     owner 323353
>     tags 323353 pending
>     thanks

The package command only indicates your mail will only be pointed to
wnpp packages, so it is quite optional. Use it when dealing with lots of
bug commands on different bugs on a single mail.

And yes, the owner command is quite useful. It gets you a good track of
the bugs you are concerning. Just note that your owner command up there
is wrong and it will send you errors.

The 'pending' tag is quite optional. The only thing is it won't help you
in any way.

Anyway, when a user sent an RFP bug, the only good thing you could do is
re-title to ITP, set you as the owner, work on the package and find an
sponsor.

> | >    W: jwm: changelog-should-mention-nmu
> | 
> | That's because you are still using the NMU version format:
> 
> Ah. That will be fixed when we're ready.

Remember to include the Closes: statement when we're ready.

> | Not really. Again, what are you using your debian/dirs file for? Can you
> | please elaborate a bit?
> 
> My mistake. dirs file is not needed, since the makefile creates
> all needed dirs. I recorded previously:
> 
>   jwm (0.23-1.10) unstable; urgency=low
>   * debian/dirs: File removed. Unnecessary
> 
> Forgot to actually delete that file. Fixed.

Common mistake if you use dch *before* applying changes.

> | Again, what about /usr/share/sessions? I use GDM, how am I going to
> | launch (or any other mortal user) jwm?
> 
> Didn't know about that. The 'Debian Menu System' document was silent.
> /usr/share/xsessions/Jwm.desktop now included.
> 
> I test the jwm by launching
> 
>    # startx $(which jwm) -- :1
> 
> and then accessing Ctrl-Alt-F8 without interrupting the current
> WM session.

Good. The menu thing is optional anyway only as a suggestion. If we
upload it without that we can still drink beer. Anyway, I could file a
wishlist bug requesting that on the future :)

> | A few more observations:
> | - What about using the alternatives system to ship a Debianized
> | configuration file for the menu? example.jvmrc lists programs I might
> | not have.
> 
> Fluxbox uses something like that to generate menus from installed
> programs. But that's a little rigid system. The menu generator needs
> to be run every time separately when programs are installed. I'll
> look into that menu-methods later.

Later has arrived. Take a look, if you really think it doesn't worth it,
well, drop it. If not, try to do a good package that could impress your
AM in the future :)

> I've written an alternative "all purpose" menu infrastructure helper
> programs that are part of `stem-desktop-base', which can be coupled
> with `stem-desktop-jwm' to get a working environment immediately.
> It's a very new project and if you have time I'd like to hear your
> comments if that could be included and generalized for Debian.
> Basicly:
> 
> 	apt-get install jwm stem-desktop-base stem-pkg-jwm
> 	                1   2                 3
> 1. Install window manager
> 2. install infrastructure programs in /usr/lib/...
> 3. Provide menus that take advantage of the infrastructure
> 
> But this is not essential now.

Well, I think it could benefit the user yes, improvements on any way are
always welcome by everybody. That is the kind of thing that makes your
package shine.

> | - What are your thoughts towards NM process?
> 
> Sure. I have packages of my own that I'd like to maintain in Debian.
> Some of the packages are not currently there in good shape (I'm author
> of e.g. procmail-lib; see sf.net for all projects). I've read about the
> bureaucracy and that the waiting time is extraordinary, so if you can
> expedite, I'm all ears how to help.

All I can do now is keep on working with you and advocate you in the
process. Do you have a GPG key? Signed by a DD? Where are you from?
Finland? (I was last month :) Do you other packages officially in the
archive?

> New uploaded done.

A few more comments:

- According to a very recent mail from one of the ftp-masters, please
remove unnecessary commented lines on debian/rules. Take more of his
advices, please. See:

- You don't have your jwm.menu-method anywhere on your package, and if
you place it, you will have to depend on menu, not only recommended.
Therefore, the postinst and postrm are useless. Include everything in
there, please.

- You don't have to build-depend on gcc.

- I have now installed the package, and actually I'm writing this mail
to you from jwm :-) I use GDM, so it was nice and easy to change between
desktop environments.

- Probably it's time to set up the very last changes I suggested you and
prepare for an upload?

- Please allow mails from my personal address (damog@damog.net). I got a
previous mail rejected by your mail server.

Have fun,

-- 
David Moreno Garza <damog@debian.org> | http://www.damog.net/
 GPG: C671257D - 6EF6 C284 C95D 78F6 0B78 FFD3 981C 5FD7 C671 257D
 Signed mail welcome. Encrypted mail preferred.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


--- End Message ---

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: