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

Groups > linux.debian.bugs.dist > #1223114 > unrolled thread

Bug#1089248: ITS: rcs-blame

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.bugs.dist

Contents

  Bug#1089248: ITS: rcs-blame наб <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz> - 2024-12-07 19:10 +0100
    Bug#1089248: ITS: rcs-blame Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2024-12-08 15:00 +0100
      Bug#1089248: ITS: rcs-blame наб <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz> - 2024-12-08 16:00 +0100
        Bug#1089248: ITS: rcs-blame Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2024-12-08 16:20 +0100
          Bug#1089248: ITS: rcs-blame Thomas Dickey <dickey@his.com> - 2024-12-08 17:20 +0100
        Bug#1089248: ITS: rcs-blame Thomas Dickey <dickey@his.com> - 2024-12-08 17:20 +0100

#1223114 — Bug#1089248: ITS: rcs-blame

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

Source: rcs-blame
Severity: important
X-Debbugs-Cc: Package Salvaging Team <team+salvage@tracker.debian.org>

Dear Maintainer,

I'm interested in salvaging your package rcs-blame, in accordance with the
Package Salvaging procedure outlined in the Developers Reference[1].
Your package meets the criteria for this process, and I would love to
assist in preserving and maintaining it. As the Salvage process
suggests, here is a list of the criteria that apply, in my opinion:

  - NMUs (more than one NMU in a row).
  - Bugs filed against the package do not have answers from the
    maintainer.
  - Upstream has released several versions, but despite there being
    a bug entry asking for it, it has not been packaged.
  - There are QA issues with the package.

I believe your package would be a great addition to the Debian team, and I
took the liberty to create the Salsa repository here[2]. If you choose
not to accept the ITS, I'd be more than happy to help you move it to
another location, such as debian/, or wherever you prefer. My goal is to
make it as easy as possible for you to join the team. I'd also be
delighted to assist in adding you as a team member if you could share
your Salsa login.

Your package was highlighted in the Bug of the Day[3] initiative, which
aims to introduce newcomers to manageable tasks and guide them through
the workflow to solve them. The focus of this initiative is on migrating
packages to Salsa, as it's a great way to familiarize newcomers with a
consistent Git-based workflow.

Best,

[1] https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.en.html#package-salvaging
[2] https://salsa.debian.org/debian/rcs-blame
[3] https://salsa.debian.org/tille/tiny_qa_tools/-/wikis/Tiny-QA-tasks

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 12.8
  APT prefers stable-updates
  APT policy: (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'stable-security'), (500, 'stable-debug'), (500, 'stable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 6.1.0-27-amd64 (SMP w/24 CPU threads; PREEMPT)
Kernel taint flags: TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE, TAINT_FIRMWARE_WORKAROUND, TAINT_OOT_MODULE, TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE
Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=en_GB:en
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
LSM: AppArmor: enabled

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1223216

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

Dear наб,

Am Sat, Dec 07, 2024 at 06:58:52PM +0100 schrieb наб:
> I'm interested in salvaging your package rcs-blame, in accordance with the
> Package Salvaging procedure outlined in the Developers Reference[1].
> Your package meets the criteria for this process, and I would love to
> assist in preserving and maintaining it. As the Salvage process
> suggests, here is a list of the criteria that apply, in my opinion:
> 
>   - NMUs (more than one NMU in a row).
>   - Bugs filed against the package do not have answers from the
>     maintainer.
>   - Upstream has released several versions, but despite there being
>     a bug entry asking for it, it has not been packaged.
>   - There are QA issues with the package.

that's all true, but are you an rcs user or have you ever been one?

because you don't give any reason why the package is useful to you or
anyone else today - you just gave reasons why it's ok to transfer
maintainership, which in itself has no value if the package has no value
today anymore.

I'm very happy about QA efforts in general, but some cleanups IMO achieve
the opposite of cleanup: they prevent removal of things which should be
cleaned up and removed.


-- 
cheers,
	Holger

 ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
 ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
 ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀  OpenPGP: B8BF54137B09D35CF026FE9D 091AB856069AAA1C
 ⠈⠳⣄

Climate Justice is that moment when we can start looking each other in the
eyes again. (Luisa Neubauer)

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

#1223224

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

On Sun, Dec 08, 2024 at 02:54:23PM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
> Am Sat, Dec 07, 2024 at 06:58:52PM +0100 schrieb наб:
> > I'm interested in salvaging your package rcs-blame, in accordance with the
> > Package Salvaging procedure outlined in the Developers Reference[1].
> > Your package meets the criteria for this process, and I would love to
> > assist in preserving and maintaining it. As the Salvage process
> > suggests, here is a list of the criteria that apply, in my opinion:
> > 
> >   - NMUs (more than one NMU in a row).
> >   - Bugs filed against the package do not have answers from the
> >     maintainer.
> >   - Upstream has released several versions, but despite there being
> >     a bug entry asking for it, it has not been packaged.
> >   - There are QA issues with the package.
> that's all true, but are you an rcs user or have you ever been one?
I've had the dubious pleasure, but I must also've clearly misremembered
the utility of this package to me, personally
(I thought I used it previously on SCCS dumps
 (a common occurrence for me unfortunately),
 but it doesn't work there, it only works on CVS dumps).

> because you don't give any reason why the package is useful to you or
> anyone else today - you just gave reasons why it's ok to transfer
> maintainership, which in itself has no value if the package has no value
> today anymore.
Fair cop; in the other bugs, Dickey says he uses it regularly;
so regularly in fact that he's also become the upstream
(and that's what I've packaged at
 https://salsa.debian.org/debian/rcs-blame).
I was going to ask him if, since he's also the upstream,
he wants to be the listed maintainer, which would tighten the
maintainer/user loop, but you beat me to it here.

> I'm very happy about QA efforts in general, but some cleanups IMO achieve
> the opposite of cleanup: they prevent removal of things which should be
> cleaned up and removed.
I don't disagree here (and the BOTD bugs tend to point out packages that
do just want to be removed, that's like half of the RM queue rn).
But in principle this package is useful for the same reason RCS is useful.
We should be shipping the extended RCS toolchain as long as we're
shipping RCS itself IMO, and that's not going away any time soon.

OTOH the popcon is looking awfully 0-y (while RCS's very much is not),
and the new upstream is the first google result for "RCS blame", so.

I've added Dickey to Cc:,
maybe he can opine on what the best course of action would be
(be it keeping the package with him as the downstream maintainer,
 removing it,
 or a different third thing).

Best,

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

#1223229

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

On Sun, Dec 08, 2024 at 03:46:18PM +0100, наб wrote:
> Fair cop; in the other bugs, Dickey says he uses it regularly;
> so regularly in fact that he's also become the upstream
> (and that's what I've packaged at
>  https://salsa.debian.org/debian/rcs-blame).

that sounds pretty sufficient to me! thanks for confirming it is
useful and sorry for having been a bit harsh in my initial mail.

> OTOH the popcon is looking awfully 0-y (while RCS's very much is not),

rcs's popcon is indeed, uhm, amazing.

> > I'm very happy about QA efforts in general, but some cleanups IMO achieve
> > the opposite of cleanup: they prevent removal of things which should be
> > cleaned up and removed.
> I don't disagree here (and the BOTD bugs tend to point out packages that
> do just want to be removed, that's like half of the RM queue rn).

I'm glad to hear this initiative causes so many removal bugs to be filed.
I guess I mostly see the "other side" of it, packages being salvaged and
some of them trigger me thinking "why oh why is that kept".

Thanks for these explainations and your qa work in the first place!


-- 
cheers,
	Holger

 ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
 ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
 ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀  OpenPGP: B8BF54137B09D35CF026FE9D 091AB856069AAA1C
 ⠈⠳⣄

wirklicher reichtum ist nicht privatjet fliegen, sondern sich vor dem schützen
können, was privatjet fliegen auslöst." <3 böhmermann am 3.2.23

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

#1223237

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

On Sun, Dec 08, 2024 at 03:11:05PM +0000, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 08, 2024 at 03:46:18PM +0100, наб wrote:
> > Fair cop; in the other bugs, Dickey says he uses it regularly;
> > so regularly in fact that he's also become the upstream
> > (and that's what I've packaged at
> >  https://salsa.debian.org/debian/rcs-blame).

fwiw, all of the other packages for rcs-blame are using my updated version:

https://software.opensuse.org/package/blame
https://cgit.freebsd.org/ports/tree/devel/blame/
https://github.com/NetBSD/pkgsrc/devel/blame/
https://github.com/openbsd/ports/devel/blame/

(oddly, no one packages rcshist, which I use as often).
 
> that sounds pretty sufficient to me! thanks for confirming it is
> useful and sorry for having been a bit harsh in my initial mail.
> 
> > OTOH the popcon is looking awfully 0-y (while RCS's very much is not),
> 
> rcs's popcon is indeed, uhm, amazing.

Actually I use my own package for rcs (with a fix for a longstanding
bug in that program as well as keyword changes for xterm, lynx, and mawk).

So I wouldn't be counted in popcon (I opted out anyway).
 
> > > I'm very happy about QA efforts in general, but some cleanups IMO achieve
> > > the opposite of cleanup: they prevent removal of things which should be
> > > cleaned up and removed.
> > I don't disagree here (and the BOTD bugs tend to point out packages that
> > do just want to be removed, that's like half of the RM queue rn).
> 
> I'm glad to hear this initiative causes so many removal bugs to be filed.
> I guess I mostly see the "other side" of it, packages being salvaged and
> some of them trigger me thinking "why oh why is that kept".
> 
> Thanks for these explainations and your qa work in the first place!
> 
> 
> -- 
> cheers,
> 	Holger
> 
>  ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
>  ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
>  ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀  OpenPGP: B8BF54137B09D35CF026FE9D 091AB856069AAA1C
>  ⠈⠳⣄
> 
> wirklicher reichtum ist nicht privatjet fliegen, sondern sich vor dem schützen
> können, was privatjet fliegen auslöst." <3 böhmermann am 3.2.23



-- 
Thomas E. Dickey <dickey@invisible-island.net>
https://invisible-island.net

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

#1223238

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

On Sun, Dec 08, 2024 at 03:46:18PM +0100, наб wrote:
...
> I've added Dickey to Cc:,
> maybe he can opine on what the best course of action would be
> (be it keeping the package with him as the downstream maintainer,
>  removing it,
>  or a different third thing).

I'm willing to do package maintenance, but keep in mind that I need a sponsor
for the uploads.

coincidentally, it's next on my regular program maintenance here:

	https://github.com/ThomasDickey?page=2&tab=repositories

-- 
Thomas E. Dickey <dickey@invisible-island.net>
https://invisible-island.net

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.bugs.dist

csiph-web