Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #7872 > unrolled thread

Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.maint.python

Contents

  Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-23 09:30 +0100
    Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-23 09:40 +0100
      Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-23 18:20 +0100
        Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-23 22:00 +0100
          Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-24 18:40 +0100
            Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-24 19:30 +0100
              Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-24 23:30 +0100
                Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-25 00:10 +0100
                  Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-25 01:00 +0100
                    Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-25 12:10 +0100
                      Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 15:50 +0100
                        Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 16:10 +0100
                          Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 16:20 +0100
                            Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Vincent Cheng <vcheng@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 20:20 +0100
                              Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 21:40 +0100
                                Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Vincent Bernat <bernat@debian.org> - 2015-11-27 09:30 +0100
                          Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Vincent Cheng <vcheng@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 20:30 +0100
                            Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 21:50 +0100
                          Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-27 09:50 +0100
                            Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-27 11:40 +0100
                              Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-27 13:10 +0100
                                Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2015-11-28 12:20 +0100
                  Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Vincent Bernat <bernat@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 09:30 +0100
                    Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 09:40 +0100
                      Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU)  <umlaeute@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 10:00 +0100
                        Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 10:50 +0100
                      Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Tristan Seligmann <mithrandi@mithrandi.net> - 2015-11-26 14:40 +0100
                        Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 15:10 +0100
                      Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 15:30 +0100
      Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2015-11-24 09:30 +0100
        Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Sandro Tosi <sandro.tosi@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 09:40 +0100
          Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-24 10:30 +0100
            Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2015-11-24 13:40 +0100
              Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-24 22:40 +0100
            Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Bernd Zeimetz <bernd@bzed.de> - 2015-12-06 20:20 +0100
        Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-24 09:40 +0100
    Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Daniele Tricoli <eriol@mornie.org> - 2015-11-23 12:50 +0100
      Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-23 18:20 +0100
    Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Dmitry Shachnev <mitya57@debian.org> - 2015-11-23 13:50 +0100
      Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-23 18:20 +0100
        Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Dmitry Shachnev <mitya57@debian.org> - 2015-11-24 10:40 +0100
    Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Vincent Bernat <bernat@debian.org> - 2015-11-24 09:10 +0100

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#7920

On 11/27/2015 11:31 AM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
>> Will do. FYI, I'm still waiting for the removal of
>> python-repoze.{what,what-plugins,who-plugins}, which is blocking the
>> migration of Keystone, and which therefore makes my efforts useless
>> (there's no point of uploading OpenStack without keystone). So for the
>> moment, my uploads are stalled.
> 
> what's blocking you with sphinx?

I don't want to upload it if I can't upload the rest at the same time.

> you realize some packages will have to go though NEW and sphinx is one of them?

Yes. Which is why I asked (on the backports list) the backports FTP
masters what they thought was best for the upload.

Though there's no way to make it happen correctly without having some
breakage due to NEW at some point. There's too many interactions and
inter-dependencies.

>> (build-)dependencies are satisfied, yes. Though I don't think I actually
>> need to upload in a specific order: I can push all at once if it is
>> within a single dak run (if I'm wrong here, let me know).
> 
> if you upload A that doesn't have to go through NEW and new B that A build
> depends on, A is broken.
> (if all of them will end up in NEW, ftp-masters will take care of that)

What you give above as an example is too simplistic. It works for basic
cases, but not here, with all of what I want to upload, and already
existing packages in jessie-backports.

That's one of the multiple breakage that the NEW queue brings. There's
unfortunately no way to fix that for this kind of complex uploads with
inter-dependencies and updates of existing packages. The only way,
unfortunately, is to have the NEW queue processed fast enough by the FTP
masters.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7924

On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 8:02 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote:

> That's one of the multiple breakage that the NEW queue brings. There's
> unfortunately no way to fix that for this kind of complex uploads with
> inter-dependencies and updates of existing packages. The only way,
> unfortunately, is to have the NEW queue processed fast enough by the FTP
> masters.

Pretty sure the FTP team tools for the NEW queue deal with ordering
interdepending packages correctly.

Also, the FTP team are not responsible for backports NEW, that is a
separate team.

-- 
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7899

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

 ❦ 25 novembre 2015 00:00 +0100, Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> :

>> > PS I'm getting all the emails from backports even if I wasn't the one
>> > who uploaded so this is official after all.
>> 
>> This isn't new, and it's been discussed at large. Basically, we would
>> all like the BTS to have the feature to select which is the maintainer
>> for a given suite. It is supposed to be fixed for the PPA^WBikeshed
>> support. In the mean time, we have to deal with it.
>
> until this is fixed, I consider it official Debian archive and thus
> any upload of *my* package that I do not approve: a hijack

This is not the policy for backports. Amend the policy if you
disagree. It's not fair to kick Zigo because he didn't follow the rules
and consider oneself above them when he respects them.
-- 
Don't over-comment.
            - The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7900

> This is not the policy for backports. Amend the policy if you
> disagree. It's not fair to kick Zigo because he didn't follow the rules
> and consider oneself above them when he respects them.

fix it yourself, I'm getting all the bugs and emails so there's nothing
that suggest I should use backport's policy rather then Debian's.

PS I didn't "kick" him, I told him to send me debdiff because I hope he
will realize one package will FTBFS in jessie. He's sure everything
works now so he will not fix it and I will get bug report (I'm sure as
hell he will not subscribe bugs from all these packages he plans to
upload)
-- 
Piotr Ożarowski                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer
www.ozarowski.pl          www.griffith.cc           www.debian.org
GPG Fingerprint: 1D2F A898 58DA AF62 1786 2DF7 AEF6 F1A2 A745 7645

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7901

On 2015-11-26 09:32, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> PS I didn't "kick" him, 

i think the kick in question is not your disapproval of the current
affair, but referring to past action <560C3ACD.9000905@debian.org>.

fgmasdr
IOhannes

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7902

[IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU), 2015-11-26]
> i think the kick in question is not your disapproval of the current
> affair, but referring to past action <560C3ACD.9000905@debian.org>.

then I'm glad I did that. There's a change already (we had a mail! a
mail BEFORE an upload!). I'm still not happy that it simply announces
actions with all the old problems ("I will do something that I need, you
deal with consequences")
-- 
Piotr Ożarowski                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer
www.ozarowski.pl          www.griffith.cc           www.debian.org
GPG Fingerprint: 1D2F A898 58DA AF62 1786 2DF7 AEF6 F1A2 A745 7645

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7903

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 at 10:32 Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> wrote:

> > This is not the policy for backports. Amend the policy if you
> > disagree. It's not fair to kick Zigo because he didn't follow the rules
> > and consider oneself above them when he respects them.
>
> fix it yourself, I'm getting all the bugs and emails so there's nothing
> that suggest I should use backport's policy rather then Debian's.
>

Note that regarding bug reports, the backports website states:

"Please report bugs that you found in the packages to the backports
mailinglist <http://lists.debian.org/debian-backports/> and *NOT* to the
Debian BTS!"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7904

> Note that regarding bug reports, the backports website states:
> 
> "Please report bugs that you found in the packages to the backports
> mailinglist <http://lists.debian.org/debian-backports/> and *NOT* to the
> Debian BTS!"

so why do I get them? DAK sends emails to me too and it doesn't mention
backports AT ALL! How can I distinct hostile uploads (hijacks) and
uploads from broken tools (backports.debian.org)?

anyway, I admitted in 20151123205458.GB16403@sar0.p1otr.com that it's
only a "best practice" so I cannot force zigo to do the right thing.
If he decides to upload broken package, I cannot do anything.
That doesn't change the fact that I can try to convince him that evil
Piotr sometimes has good intentions, and even if he's able to generate
debdiff (out of broken packages) then there's something wrong with his
CI/sbuild setup and we'll figure that out. He will also subscribe bugs
from all these packages just to shut up this asshole (and that's a good
outcome, even if I had to be rude; being nice doesn't work with him, I
tried that for few years, he just ignores you)
-- 
evil general Piotr

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7905

On 11/26/2015 09:32 AM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> I hope he
> will realize one package will FTBFS in jessie

Instead of playing such a game, would you mind telling which package
you're talking about?

Or is it more fun that you just keep the issue for yourself, and then
use it as a mockery, just to prove yourself right and show how bad of a
package maintainer I am?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7883

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:32 AM, Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> wrote:
> About sqlalchemy - Sandro is already working on it AFAICT, so you can
> skip this one.

gaah, sorry for not following up with this: we used that package to do
some training at work, and for various reason we cant upload the same
exact package we built here; anyway it was just a mare rebuild of
1.0.8+ds1-1 in jessie with the bpo tag appended to the pkg version. If
you want I can quickly rebuild one, or use zigo's one, Piotr just
lemme know.

regards,
-- 
Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu)
My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/
Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7885

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 8:32 AM, Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> wrote:
> [Sandro Tosi, 2015-11-24]
>> gaah, sorry for not following up with this: we used that package to do
>> some training at work, and for various reason we cant upload the same
>> exact package we built here; anyway it was just a mare rebuild of
>> 1.0.8+ds1-1 in jessie with the bpo tag appended to the pkg version. If
>> you want I can quickly rebuild one, or use zigo's one, Piotr just
>> lemme know.
>
> there's no "zigo's one", that's the point, he hides them.
> I would much more prefer you to do it (and I don't need debdiff from
> you, just upload)

cool, will do soon then! do you want me to push a branch to git? if
so, how would you like it to be called: 'jessie', 'bpo8', else?

-- 
Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu)
My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/
Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7887

[Sandro Tosi, 2015-11-24]
> cool, will do soon then! do you want me to push a branch to git? if
> so, how would you like it to be called: 'jessie', 'bpo8', else?

I don't have strong opinion about branch names yet. I like standards, so
I'd prefer one described in DEP but they're not compatible with git-dpm,
unfortunately.

>From the two suggested ones I prefer jessie, but if it's just rebuild,
I'm also fine if you don't push it at all.
-- 
Piotr Ożarowski                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer
www.ozarowski.pl          www.griffith.cc           www.debian.org
GPG Fingerprint: 1D2F A898 58DA AF62 1786 2DF7 AEF6 F1A2 A745 7645

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7889

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 9:28 AM, Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> wrote:
> [Sandro Tosi, 2015-11-24]
>> cool, will do soon then! do you want me to push a branch to git? if
>> so, how would you like it to be called: 'jessie', 'bpo8', else?
>
> I don't have strong opinion about branch names yet. I like standards, so
> I'd prefer one described in DEP but they're not compatible with git-dpm,
> unfortunately.
>
> >From the two suggested ones I prefer jessie, but if it's just rebuild,
> I'm also fine if you don't push it at all.

great, less work for me! I've just uploaded sqlalchemy 1.0.9 to jessie
backports, it was indeed just a rebuild. Thanks Piotr!

-- 
Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu)
My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/
Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7892

On 11/24/2015 01:32 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 9:28 AM, Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> wrote:
>> [Sandro Tosi, 2015-11-24]
>>> cool, will do soon then! do you want me to push a branch to git? if
>>> so, how would you like it to be called: 'jessie', 'bpo8', else?
>>
>> I don't have strong opinion about branch names yet. I like standards, so
>> I'd prefer one described in DEP but they're not compatible with git-dpm,
>> unfortunately.
>>
>> >From the two suggested ones I prefer jessie, but if it's just rebuild,
>> I'm also fine if you don't push it at all.
> 
> great, less work for me! I've just uploaded sqlalchemy 1.0.9 to jessie
> backports, it was indeed just a rebuild. Thanks Piotr!

Thanks for this upload.

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7948

On 11/24/2015 10:28 AM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> [Sandro Tosi, 2015-11-24]
>> cool, will do soon then! do you want me to push a branch to git? if
>> so, how would you like it to be called: 'jessie', 'bpo8', else?
> 
> I don't have strong opinion about branch names yet. I like standards, so
> I'd prefer one described in DEP but they're not compatible with git-dpm,
> unfortunately.


I'd suggest to use jessie-backports and add a debian/gbp.conf, which
tells gbp to point to that branch.


-- 
 Bernd Zeimetz                            Debian GNU/Linux Developer
 http://bzed.de                                http://www.debian.org
 GPG Fingerprint: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485  DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7886

[Sandro Tosi, 2015-11-24]
> gaah, sorry for not following up with this: we used that package to do
> some training at work, and for various reason we cant upload the same
> exact package we built here; anyway it was just a mare rebuild of
> 1.0.8+ds1-1 in jessie with the bpo tag appended to the pkg version. If
> you want I can quickly rebuild one, or use zigo's one, Piotr just
> lemme know.

there's no "zigo's one", that's the point, he hides them.
I would much more prefer you to do it (and I don't need debdiff from
you, just upload)
-- 
Piotr Ożarowski                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer
www.ozarowski.pl          www.griffith.cc           www.debian.org
GPG Fingerprint: 1D2F A898 58DA AF62 1786 2DF7 AEF6 F1A2 A745 7645

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7875

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hello Thomas,

On Monday, November 23, 2015 09:20:40 AM Thomas Goirand wrote:
> If you maintain one of the above packages and want to manage the bpo
> upload yourself, please let me know ASAP.

Thanks for backporting python-urllib3 and requests. If you did not have to 
make changes on the packaging to please go ahead, otherwise a debdiff will be 
very appreciated! :)

Please also consider that currently python-etcd is broken by the unbundling 
logic and we are working on it with upstream: 

    https://github.com/kennethreitz/requests/issues/2870

My plan was to backport requests when we was sure that unbundling logic was 
completely fine, but python-etcd is not in Jessie so we should not have 
problems right now.

Anyway I will backport requests again when upstream issue 2870 will be fixed.

Kind regards,

-- 
 Daniele Tricoli 'eriol'
 https://mornie.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7879

On 11/23/2015 12:34 PM, Daniele Tricoli wrote:
> Hello Thomas,
> 
> On Monday, November 23, 2015 09:20:40 AM Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> If you maintain one of the above packages and want to manage the bpo
>> upload yourself, please let me know ASAP.
> 
> Thanks for backporting python-urllib3 and requests. If you did not have to 
> make changes on the packaging to please go ahead, otherwise a debdiff will be 
> very appreciated! :)
> 
> Please also consider that currently python-etcd is broken by the unbundling 
> logic and we are working on it with upstream: 
> 
>     https://github.com/kennethreitz/requests/issues/2870
> 
> My plan was to backport requests when we was sure that unbundling logic was 
> completely fine, but python-etcd is not in Jessie so we should not have 
> problems right now.
> 
> Anyway I will backport requests again when upstream issue 2870 will be fixed.
> 
> Kind regards,

Hi,

Thanks for your reply.

If you can maintain a backport requests & urllib3 yourself, that's
perfect. This is exactly the type of reaction I was expecting from
package maintainers, and it's a lot more positive than the reaction from
Piotr.

So let's do what you suggested: if I don't see your package in
jessie-backports, I'll upload, and then you can take over as it pleases you.

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7876

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi Thomas,

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 09:20:40AM +0100, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> FYI, I intend to push the below packages to jessie-backports, as part of
> the upload of OpenStack Liberty:
> 
> alabaster contextlib2 kazoo python-cachetools python-cffi python-cliff
> python-crank python-ddt python-docker python-eventlet python-git
> python-gitdb python-hypothesis python-ldap3 python-mock python-mysqldb
> python-pathlib python-repoze.who python-setuptools python-smmap
> python-unicodecsv python-urllib3 requests routes ryu sphinx sqlalchemy
> turbogears2 unittest2 zzzeeksphinx

I will appreciate if you backport Sphinx because I was recently asked about
the same [1]. You will maybe also want to backport sphinx-rtd-theme ≥ 0.1.8-2,
where the dh_sphinxdoc experience was greatly improved.

You will also definitely have to do some changes like reverting the jquery
dependency bump made in 1.3.1-7 — Sphinx works with previous jquery versions,
but it had some issues with browser supports, that's why the dependency was
bumped.

[1]: https://bugs.debian.org/805430  (please close it in the upload)

--
Dmitry Shachnev

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7880

On 11/23/2015 01:44 PM, Dmitry Shachnev wrote:
> I will appreciate if you backport Sphinx because I was recently asked about
> the same [1].

Cool.

> You will maybe also want to backport sphinx-rtd-theme ≥ 0.1.8-2,
> where the dh_sphinxdoc experience was greatly improved.

As much as I could see, I don't need sphinx-rtd-theme in backports.

> You will also definitely have to do some changes like reverting the jquery
> dependency bump made in 1.3.1-7 — Sphinx works with previous jquery versions,
> but it had some issues with browser supports, that's why the dependency was
> bumped.

There's already a version 1.11.3+dfsg-4~bpo8+1 of jquery in backports,
which is the one I also need for my other packages. So I don't think
that one is a blocker.

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.maint.python

csiph-web