Bug#687624: [SCM] glmark2/master: RFP/ITP bug #695849 assigned
On Thu, 3 Jan 2013 23:10:15 Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 1:59 PM, <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > The following commit has been merged in the master branch:
> > commit d191a4eb0740b54661c4cc0fc288b79063e822a4
> > Author: Dmitry Smirnov <email@example.com>
> > Date: Thu Dec 13 23:59:01 2012 +1100
> > RFP/ITP bug #695849 assigned
> > diff --git a/debian/changelog b/debian/changelog
> > index 9c36013..19d9f30 100644
> > --- a/debian/changelog
> > +++ b/debian/changelog
> > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
> > glmark2 (2012.11-1) UNRELEASED; urgency=low
> > - * Initial release (Closes: #).
> > + * Initial release (Closes: #695849).
> > -- Dmitry Smirnov <firstname.lastname@example.org> Thu, 13 Dec 2012 23:31:56
> > +1100
Sorry Reinhard, I'm a bit confused which package you're talking about --
"glmark2" or "libdvdcss-pkg"? You quoted one bug but posted to another...
> TBH, I think this package is (currently) not fit for the
> pkg-multimedia team for two reasons:
> a) It does not contain the upstream sources, only the packaging
> directory debian/ is in the tree
If it is glmark2 it is easy enough to fix if you're concerned about team's
best practice. Is this so important because of team preference?
In SVN we usually track only packaging. I think choosing git shouldn't always
imply git-buildpackage repository layout...
> b) It is not backed up by some other pkg-multimedia team member.
Please help me to understand -- because I'm not sure what package you're
talking about. Do we need at least one team member to back it up?
Or would you insist on minimum two members?
> Dimitry, unless both issues can be fixed, I think collab-maint would
> serve a much better umbrella than pkg-multimedia.
Although glmark2 is finished I'm a bit reluctant to take responsibility for it
at this time but I might do it later.
Package "glmark2" is much related to multimedia and appears to be a good fit
for a team. Does it make sense to move it to collab-maint for some time? Even
if not maintained now, it's a new package so perhaps it's not too important
where it is waiting for maintainer while it is not uploaded yet.
It feels a bit like "finish it or leave"... Speaking about finishing, did you
have a chance to try it? Do you think it is useful despite failure of some
opengl (but not opengl-es) tests? If so I'm happy to own ITP even though it
might not be a right time for me.