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

Bug#822722: marked as done (RFS: tldp/0.7.7 [ITP #822181])

Your message dated Thu, 12 May 2016 08:50:50 +0000 (UTC)
with message-id <50003481.1458651.1463043050854.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#822722: RFS: tldp/0.7.7 [ITP #822181]
has caused the Debian Bug report #822722,
regarding RFS: tldp/0.7.7 [ITP #822181]
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
822722: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=822722
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: tldp
Severity: normal

Greetings Mentors and other Debian folk,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "python3-tldp":

 * Package name    : tldp
   Version         : 0.7.8
   Upstream Author : Martin A. Brown
 * URL             : https://github.com/tLDP/python-tldp.git
 * License         : MIT
   Section         : python

It builds these binary packages:

    python3-tldp - automatic publishing tool for DocBook, Linuxdoc and Asciidoc

To access further information about this package, please visit the 
following URL:

  https://github.com/tLDP/python-tldp

Also available, here:

   dget -x http://linux-ip.net/debian.ITP-822181/tldp_0.7.8.dsc

Changes since the last upload:

tldp (0.7.8) unstable; urgency=low

 * creating a manpage to satisfy Lintian, bumping version
 * renamed source package to 'tldp'
 * Initial release (Closes: #822181)

-- Martin A. Brown <martin@linux-ip.net>  Tue, 19 Apr 2016 15:40:13 -0400

This is the first upload and/or request for sponsorship of 
python3-tldp.

The package builds (successfully) using 'gpb buildpackage' straight 
from a cloned checkout (on master at HEAD).  The lintian warnings I 
see are:

  W: tldp source: newer-standards-version 3.9.8 (current is 3.9.6)
  W: tldp source: debian-watch-file-in-native-package

Thank you in advance for your time,

-Martin

P.S. If this package is suitably crafted and accepted, then I will 
move along to the ldp-docbook-stylesheets, as I mentioned on the 
debian-mentors mailing list.  I see that the sole downstream 
dependency ('apt-cache rdepends ldp-docbook-dsssl ldp-docbook-xsl') 
is 'wysihtml-el' and I will account for that.

-- 
Martin A. Brown
http://linux-ip.net/

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Closing.

On Tue, 10 May 2016 16:31:26 +0000 (UTC) Gianfranco Costamagna <locutusofborg@debian.org> wrote:
> Hi Martin,
> 
> >OK, I can do that.  Is that a requirement for submitting the 
> >package?  I added the bits and bobs that are not provided with 
> >every system to allow testing of all documentation generation on any 
> >platform or distribution.  Test coverage is at 92%:
> >
> >  https://travis-ci.org/martin-a-brown/python-tldp/jobs/126230165
> >
> >That example shows running the long tests, but even during the 
> >shorter version of the tests, which run during a typical 
> >dpkg-buildpackage execution run, many of the executables are run.
> >
> >I can try to figure out how to run the long tests during the Debian 
> >build if you think that's wise.  Just let me know what I should do.
> 
> 
> as you wish, please consider that we have a wide range of Debian derivatives too, so
> having a testsuite might help your software in becoming more robus against different versions
> of compilers, flags, libraries, etc
> 
> >If I were to enable the long tests for the Debian package build AND 
> 
> >add a few more sample document processing steps to the test suite, >it would probably exercise nearly all of the dependencies on things 
> >like jing, xsltproc, jade, opensp, asciidoc, etc...  But, they do 
> >get tested during my CI runs (on an Ubuntu system, I think), so if 
> >it is not necessary, I'd prefer to leave the package build stuff 
> >separate (and fast).
> 
> 
> as you wish, but...
> http://debomatic-amd64.debian.net/distribution#unstable/tldp/0.7.12-1/buildlog
> 
> the three test are failing on a clean sbuild environment
> 
> 
> >And, I did not find a 'debian' branch.  Could you perhaps point me 
> >to a URL?
> 
> 
> borgbackup is maintained with mixed histories (debian and upstream git commits)
> in the borg.git debian repository (collab-maint)
> 
> >I used dput 'dput mentors tldp_0.7.12-1_source.changes' and I got 
> >back a bunch of output (ending like this).
> 
> 
> completely correct!
> 
> anyway, it was failing to build on DebOMatic sbuild, but not on local
> pbuilder-dist environment.
> 
> I sponsored it to new queue, we will see once the package is accepted how the build goes
> with Ubuntu builders (please don't forget that :p)
> 
> in the meanwhile feel free to experiment some builds and ask me for sponsorship of a -2 revision
> if you have a testsuite fix.
> 
> 
> thanks for your contribution to Debian!

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

--- End Message ---
Reply to: