On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 08:38:58 +0200 Christian Ehrhardt <christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 7:41 AM, C.J. Collier <cjcollier@linuxfoundation.org > > wrote: > > > On Wed, 24 Feb 2016 11:51:20 +0100 Christian Ehrhardt <paelzer@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > > But I'm not a Debian developer, so I'd like to have a more Debian centric > > > co-maintainer for a proper Debian expertise and opinion in all the work. > > > I'm also no DD, so sponsors will be needed. > > > > I'm interested in co-maintaining this package, and I've been a Debian user > > for a couple of decades now. I've even been an uploader, years ago. > > > > Hi C.J., > great to hear that you want to help as well - I'm sure it will get great. > We are Currently three people: > - Luca Boccassi - DM, already applied for package upload permissions > - Martin Thiago - Experienced in experimenting with DPDK/Debian/Ubuntu, > giving us a broad testing&usage range > - Myself - Packaging DPDK for Ubuntu, Testing DPDK with integrated tests > and Openvswitch-DPDK > > You would be a great addition to our group - more Debian experience will > surely help. > > > > I've submitted an ITP for the FD.io group of packages: > > > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=819516 > > > > These depend on DPDK, so I've got an interest in making sure the DPDK > > packages are good. > > > > From what I learned with packaging DPDK 2.2 for Ubuntu 16.04 there are a > lot of things that can fail with DPDK. > It is a great, but also fast moving and bleeding edge project. > So testing and patching is needed - more packages "Consuming" the library > and thereby more diverse test exposure help exactly with that. > > The three of us kind of agreed on the following rough schedule: > - (Now / Luca) Requesting upload permissions for DPDK > - (Now / Me) Completing testing and fixing DPDK packaging in ubuntu > - (11th of May / All of us) start a kick off for packaging DPDK in Debian > > The next DPDK release changes a lot regarding the build system and the > shared library handling, so on one hand IMHO it would avoid a lot of > restructuring if we start with 16.04 release. > But OTOH consuming packages might need older DPDK API / shared library > handling versions that might no more be supported. > But among many other things - that is one of the bigger topics we want to > discuss and agree on the kick-off. > > I hope that schedule works for you and it would be great to add you to the > kick-off and our later work. Hi, Some good news: Andreas Beckmann [CC'ed] has kindly agreed to whitelist me for DPDK uploads. Unfortunately one cannot be whitelisted for a package that is not uploaded yet (since it is unknown to the system), but he proposed to do the very first upload to the NEW queue, and then whitelist my PGP key so that I can take over afterwards. Thanks again for the help Andreas! Kind regards, Luca Boccassi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part