Re: r4182 - in trunk/packages/adun.app/trunk/debian: . patches

[Andreas Tille-5]

Hi Yavor,

On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 09:36:36PM +0000, Yavor Doganov wrote:

> Author: yavor-guest
> Date: 2009-10-07 21:36:36 +0000 (Wed, 07 Oct 2009)
> New Revision: 4182
>    ...
> Log:
> * New upstream release.
> * debian/compat: Set to 7.
> * debian/control (Uploaders): Reluctantly add myself.
>   (Build-Depends): Bump debhelper to >= 7.  Add imagemagick for the icon
>   conversion.
>   (Standards-Version): Claim compliance with 3.8.3.
>   (Depends): Add ${gnustep:Depends}.
> * debian/patches/10_gcc-4.3-inline.dpatch:
> * debian/patches/25_mipsel-ftbfs.dpatch: Remove; fixed upstream.
> * debian/patches/15_link-properly.dpatch: Update and remove the
>   workaround for the GSL linking issue; fixed in binutils
>   (http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2009-01/msg00413.html).
> * debian/patches/20_paths.dpatch: Refresh.
> * debian/patches/00list: Update.
> * debian/rules (external): New variable.
>   (build-stamp): Convert the icon in XPM format.
>   (install): Use dh_prep instead of dh_clean -k.  Install the XPM icon.
>   (clean-patched): Don't make the `clean' target, `distclean' is
>   sufficient.  Delete the generated icon.
> * debian/UL.desktop: Bump version, add Icon field.
> * debian/menu: Add icon.
> * debian/watch: Comment out the uversionmangle option, does harm with
>   the current state of affairs.
> * debian/copyright: Update copyright years.  Mention that the package is
>   distributed under GPLv3+.
> * debian/README.source: New file.

many thanks for your extensive work on adun.app.  I admit I hesitated to
touch this package because of the lack of knowledge of GNUStep.  Your
polishing of the packaging looks quite outright.  Again, thanks for this!

I have one question when looking at the upstream tarball which has grown
five times in size and probably one reason is the addition of
ExternalPackages/StepTalk:  I see the directory in the source but
neither do I see a sign that it is used in the build ("grep -i steptalk
*.build" is empty) nor do I see Debian's steptalk package in the
(Build-)Depends.  Could you clarify the issue of StepTalk?  If it is
completely unused code we might consider stripping it from the source
tarball.  (I'm a friend of cleaning source tarball from large chunks
of unused data - others don't.  So I leave it to your decision.)

I fixed two cosmetical lintian issues.  I'm also a bit concerned about
the lintian info:

   adun.app: arch-dep-package-has-big-usr-share 4136kB 56%

So we might consider splitting the binary packages in an arch: any and
an arch: all (adun.app-common or something like that) which contains
all the architecture independent stuff.

I also have seen that you added yourself as Uploader.  That's perfectly
OK.  So if you think the package is ready for upload just go for it.

Kind regards

      Andreas.

--
http://fam-tille.de


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-med-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...

[Yavor Doganov-3]

Andreas Tille wrote:
> I have one question when looking at the upstream tarball which has grown
> five times in size and probably one reason is the addition of
> ExternalPackages/StepTalk:

Yes, the rest is lots of new code and additional features.  Actually
StepTalk is relevantly small, the big stuff is UL/Resources/AdunHelp
(not installed and not viewable with helpviewer.app anyway).

> I see the directory in the source but neither do I see a sign that
> it is used in the build ("grep -i steptalk *.build" is empty) nor do
> I see Debian's steptalk package in the (Build-)Depends.

Right, it's not built because we currently don't build the plugins.
(One of the plugins, AdunShell, depends on StepTalk.)  But even when we
do, we will of course use the Debian steptalk package and not the
bundled one.

> If it is completely unused code we might consider stripping it from
> the source tarball.

It is and will be completely unused, but I don't think that would gain
much:

yavor@hatch:/tmp/Adun-0.81$ tar czf steptalk.tar.gz ExternalPackages; \
  du -h steptalk.tar.gz
160K  steptalk.tar.gz

>    adun.app: arch-dep-package-has-big-usr-share 4136kB 56%

Yes, I saw that too, but I think it's better to wait to see how this
will change when we start building the plugins.  Or we may separate
them in another adun.app-plugins package, so it would be the right
time to also split adun.app-common (to avoid passing throug NEW
twice).

For the plugins, the following needs to happen:

1) The Debian steptalk package should be repackaged properly as a
   shared library.

2) Adun assumes all the plugins are installed in $HOME/adun, which is
   of course not acceptable.  It is fairly straightforward to patch it
   and change the code to search for the system Bundles location, but
   I'm thinking of a more general solution that would be acceptable
   upstream (so that we don't have to carry out the patch forever, and
   for the benefit of other users too).

> So if you think the package is ready for upload just go for it.

Yes, I think it's ready.  (I can't upload, though.)


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-med-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...

[Andreas Tille-5]

On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 10:21:11AM +0300, Yavor Doganov wrote:
> ...

Thanks for the extensive explanation.  Everything sounds very reasonable and
I agree in all points.

> > So if you think the package is ready for upload just go for it.
>
> Yes, I think it's ready.  (I can't upload, though.)

I would welcome if you would go for it.

Many thanks

     Andreas.

--
http://fam-tille.de


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-med-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...

[Andreas Tille-5]

On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 10:38:04AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > Yes, I think it's ready.  (I can't upload, though.)
>
> I would welcome if you would go for it.

Uhmm, sorry - I have missed the "'t".  So I will go for the upload.

Thanks

    Andreas.

--
http://fam-tille.de


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-med-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...

[Yavor Doganov-3]

On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 10:38:04AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 10:21:11AM +0300, Yavor Doganov wrote:
> > > So if you think the package is ready for upload just go for it.
> >
> > Yes, I think it's ready.  (I can't upload, though.)
                                 ^^^^^
> I would welcome if you would go for it.

But dak will most definitely reject my upload (IANADD, IANADM)...
Should I seek a sponsor on -mentors or someone from the team can upload?


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-med-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...

[Andreas Tille-5]

On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 12:13:47PM +0300, Yavor Doganov wrote:
> > > Yes, I think it's ready.  (I can't upload, though.)
>                                  ^^^^^
> > I would welcome if you would go for it.
>
> But dak will most definitely reject my upload (IANADD, IANADM)...
> Should I seek a sponsor on -mentors or someone from the team can upload?

As you might have noticed I realised my mistake.  I have read your name
at www.debian.org/devel/people and thus I assumed you would be a DD (and
was curious why you are using an alioth guest account at the same time).
Did you applied for DM?  I'd consider it as a good idea.  As long as you
are not you will find sponsors on the Debian Med list for the packages
in our field in any case.

Thanks again for your effort

     Andreas.

--
http://fam-tille.de


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-med-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...

[Yavor Doganov-3]

Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 12:13:47PM +0300, Yavor Doganov wrote:
> > > > Yes, I think it's ready.  (I can't upload, though.)
> >                                  ^^^^^
> >
> As you might have noticed I realised my mistake.

Yes, sorry for my subsequent extra message, I wrote and sent it
seconds before reading yours.

Many thanks for the upload.  Let's hope I didn't miss any regression
on mipsen.

> I have read your name at www.debian.org/devel/people

AFAIK every package maintainer is listed there, regardless of DD/DM
status.

> Did you applied for DM?

No.

> I'd consider it as a good idea.

I don't feel this way, unfortunately (or not).  Having the right to
upload software in Debian is a big responsibility, and I don't think
I'm 100% ready (technically).  Surely, I realize that the sponsors'
review is extra burden on them, but it is better if distro quality
wins at the end.  For DM, I'd need DDs to support my application which
is pretty hard considering the obscure areas I'm interested in
(GNUstep mostly and some unpopular packages like kazehakase).

And perhaps the main reason that's stopping me is that I have several
fundamental disagreements on philosophical level about some of the
goals and activities of the Debian project.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-med-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...