Path: csiph.com!2.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!news.unit0.net!news.mixmin.net!aioe.org!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From: Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com>
Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python
Subject: Re: Packaging new version of ZODB (Zope Object Database)
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2016 03:20:01 +0100
Message-ID: <szfNf-65A-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
References: <syMLf-4lI-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <syT0l-87l-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <szcFH-3Yv-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
Old-Return-Path: <debian@kitterman.com>
User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Approved: robomod@news.nic.it
Lines: 42
Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway
Sender: robomod@news.nic.it
Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:8973



On November 2, 2016 6:51:56 PM EDT, Barry Warsaw <barry@debian.org> wrote:
>On Nov 02, 2016, at 10:46 AM, Arnaud Fontaine wrote:
>
>>> I write  to debian-python, because  some of the involved  packages
>are
>>> not specific to  Zope. Actually, I even think that  ZODB itself is
>not
>>> specific to Zope, but well,  changing section of existing packages
>can
>>> be another topic.  
>>
>>This has  already been discussed  but all  the packages in  pkg-zope
>SVN
>>repository will have to be  moved to python-{modules, apps}
>repositories
>>(because there  is almost no activity  on pkg-zope and most  modules
>are
>>used independently  of Zope anyway)  and we should use  debian-python
>ML
>>for the  same reason,  so yes,  please use  debian-python ML  and
>commit
>>everything to python-{modules, apps} repositories.
>
>+1.  I do still touch some of the ztk packages and would dearly love to
>ditch
>svn, but just haven't had the time to think about a proper migration. 
>Should
>we just admit defeat and do on-demand conversions, preserving history
>if
>possible but not worrying about it too much?
>
>And then what about just using gbp and ignoring git-dpm?  The latter
>still
>kind of works but we know it's a dead-end.  Anybody looked at dgit?  Is
>that
>a useful option?

Dgit and git-dpm are orthogonal.  I'd suggest converting the same way we did DPMT for now and then they'll be included in whatever we migrate to next.

Scott K