Re: Bug#964736: ITP: public-inbox -- Mailing list archiver

["Uwe Kleine-König" <ukleinek@debian.org>]

Hello Eric,

On 7/9/20 10:15 PM, Eric Wong wrote:
> Uwe Kleine-König <ukleinek@debian.org> wrote:
>> Package: wnpp
>> Severity: wishlist
>> Owner: Uwe Kleine-König <ukleinek@debian.org>
>>
>> * Package name    : public-inbox
>>   Version         : 1.5.0
>>   Upstream Author : Eric Wong <e@yhbt.net> and others
>> * URL             : https://www.public-inbox.org/
>> * License         : AGPL-3.0
>>   Programming Lang: Perl
>>   Description     : versatile mailing (list) archiver
>>
>> This software powers https://lore.kernel.org/ and also
>> http://www.public-inbox.org/ itself. It's the server-side counter part
> 
> +Cc: meta@public-inbox.org

The original mail should have been Cc:d already to there.

> Probably better to list https://public-inbox.org/hosted.html

noted.

> instead of its "homepage" as an example.  Also, no need for
> "www.", URLs with Message-IDs are long enough as they are and
> I'm unlikely to ever to want multiple IPs/hosts behind
> public-inbox.org.

I don't feel strong here. I doubt that the homepage field will be used
to create a Message-Id-Link from it.

>> for b4 that is already packaged in Debian.
>>
>> Currently I evaluate it to provide an archive for several work related
>> mailing lists.
>>
>> Depending on the outcome of this evaluation I might or might not actually
>> package public-inbox. But as deploying is easy using debian packages I
>> will create at least simple packaging which should at a minimum give a
>> good start for someone to pick up from me.
> 
> Great to hear.  I'm somewhat familiar with Debian packaging and
> debhelper, so I can help.

I already have a prototype at
https://salsa.debian.org/ukleinek/public-inbox

If you want to take a look ... I'm nearly sure the list of dependencies
is incomplete.

> Fwiw, I've been thinking about providing "make deb-pkg" and
> "make bindeb-pkg" targets (identical to what Linux kernel
> provides) for end users to build their own packages, too.  It
> would be non-intrusive to distro packagers (no "debian/"
> directory in VCS).

Here I also don't care much, I'd use the official package :-)

Thanks for your feedback
Uwe