[pkg-fso-maint] Upload to main?

[Joachim Breitner]

Hi,

Am Freitag, den 03.10.2008, 13:04 +0200 schrieb Luca Capello:
> On Thu, 02 Oct 2008 15:29:50 +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, den 02.10.2008, 15:16 +0200 schrieb Luca Capello:
> >> Debian-specific patches need to be managed through quilt.  And I'd
> >> split off all the Openmoko-related files (sounds, scenarios and so
> >> on).  I planned to do that, but I still don't understand what free
> >> time means...
> >
> > I’m not convinced that we need quilt (can’t do plain git what we
> > need), but otherwise I agree that the packages need some clean up
> > before the final upload.
> 
> For sure the packages need some clean up (at least manpages...)!

But that’s no show-stopper, isn’t it?

> About quilt: I don't really like to have modified files in Git, since
> AFAIK there's no way to see the differences at a glance and then we
> cannot use the patches.debian.net infrastructure.  I named quilt because
> From IIRC it was the best solution after the discussions on d-d [1].
> 
> Obviously, I'm fine with any other solution :-)

patches.debian.net is a good point, and quilt is fine with me.

> > BTW, installing the scenarios in /usr/share, and have fso-frameworkd
> > look in /etc first sounds good. We can implement that as a Debian
> > specific patch if upstream does not like it.
> 
> I must say that I was expecting an upstream answer to my last mail on
> that matter [2].
> 
> I'm not a Python expert and ATM this is not really a stopper for me,
> since you don't have a "easy" system to modify the scenarios.  But if
> you want to implement it, please go on :-)

I think I can do it (but not now)

> >> Nothing to say on those, except that I'd prefer the Maintainer: to be
> >> the team list, less need for usertags then.
> >
> > I’m fine with that. I forgot pypennotes in the list, which also needs a
> > cleanup release with regard to binary name capitalization.
> 
> IIRC we haven't had any upstream reply on that matter, have we?

I think he agreed to fix it with the next version.

> >> >  * zhone-session (or maybe the nodm we’ve been talking about)
> >> 
> >> I'd go directly with ndm/nodm [1]: I also planned this, but the same as
> >> above.
> >
> > Agreed.
> 
> We should go on, then.
>
> Would you like to manage that or do you prefer Python coding?  :-D

I think I’ll do it soon. I’d like to write a small C helper for proper
PAM interaction, though, otherwise it would be almost trivial, based on
zhone-session.

> BTW, I'd say that nodm can be directly managed by the pkg-fso, i.e. it
> doesn't need its own Alioth project.  Is it OK for you?

Sure.

/me hopes to allocate a bit more time for pkg-fso in the near future :-)

Greetings,
Joachim
-- 
Joachim "nomeata" Breitner
Debian Developer
  nomeata at debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C
  JID: nomeata at joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-fso-maint/attachments/20081003/841d1cb8/attachment.pgp