more debian (and other) packaging of plugins?

[John Arbash Meinel]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Reinhard Tartler wrote:
| John Arbash Meinel <john at arbash-meinel.com> writes:
|
|> Reinhard Tartler wrote:
|> | "Martin Pool" <mbp at sourcefrog.net> writes:
|> |
|> |> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Martin Pool <mbp at sourcefrog.net> wrote:
|> |>> "Debian Packages
|> |>>
|> |>> Bazaar releases are regularly packaged into sid/unstable. Backports for
|> |>> stable are made available a bit later on backports.org."
|> |> I feel we've been doing reasonably well at getting bzr and bzrtools
|> |> releases into the Launchpad PPA fairly quickly, but we could take this
|> |> a bit further:
|> |>
|> |>  * packaging more plugins (either individually or as a big bundle
bzr-plugins?)
|> |
|> | This would imply that each time a plugin is updated we need to reupload
|> | all plugins. Moreover we would need some way to sort bugreports among
|> | the plugins there.
|> |
|>
|> If they were packaged individually, with a meta-package that installed them all,
|> would you need to upload all of them each time? It seems like the meta can just
|> depend on either *any* version or version >= XXX, which will be satisfied with a
|> newer version.
|
| Martins intention was to get the plugins updated more quickly. Since
| maintaining plugins in individual packages increase maintenance labor I
| don't think your proposal would help here.

I would actually think small updates would be easier than large ones. Though I
have to say it is a surprising amount of overhead to generate a .deb file.

|
|> | How about granting more developers access to the bzr PPA? I think at
|> | least the pkg-bazaar packaging group on alioth should have, but I don't
|> | see any particular reason to not also allow all motus to upload there.
|> |
|> | Moreover I'd like to see the packaging branches for the pkg-bazaar group
|> | packages shared with the PPA packages. They are currently hosted on
|> | bzr.debian.org, and I could imagine that we can mirror them on launchpad.
|> |
|>
|> Everyone who is on the '~bzr' team has access to the PPA, I wouldn't really want
|> to open it up more than that (and we have certainly discussed restricting it
more).
|
| Could you please elaborate on that? You obviously trust members of
| pkg-bazaar to properly maintain bazaar related packages in debian (and
| therefore ubuntu) but not in the PPA?
|

I would be surprised if there are people in pkg-bazaar that are not in ~bzr.
More relevantly, though, I don't have a say in what goes into debian, because I
am not a debian maintainer.

I do have a say about what goes into ~bzr/+archive, and I feel somewhat
responsible for what ends up in there. I suppose it just depends on how close I
feel to a possible source, and how much I feel it is "official" for the given
object. A release of *bzr* in the ~bzr/+archive makes it an official release
from the people who wrote it. Something in "debian/bzr" is not.

By the same token, allowing random people to put things in ~bzr/+archive would
indicate the *project* signing off on them. Which I am hesitant to do, unless we
have actually done some level of auditing.

John
=:->
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkhRmkMACgkQJdeBCYSNAAODZgCggr8nNJAZMSfvDv8yAjXLPUcK
KekAn0vRnL3YO34nDEoU3DHz16aC1ooP
=DTc1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----