From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from localhost (dcvr.yhbt.net [127.0.0.1]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A2AA1F9FD; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 18:57:35 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2021 18:57:35 +0000 From: Eric Wong To: Uwe =?utf-8?Q?Kleine-K=C3=B6nig?= Cc: meta@public-inbox.org Subject: Re: public-inbox in Debian Message-ID: <20210304185735.GB19350@dcvr> References: <20210304070601.mpige7mkw3xp7e6l@pengutronix.de> <20210304081235.GA4144@dcvr> <20210304092124.ssx2bgduyuqojzh2@pengutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20210304092124.ssx2bgduyuqojzh2@pengutronix.de> List-Id: Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > Hello Eric, > > On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 08:12:35AM +0000, Eric Wong wrote: > > Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > just a quick note to let you know that I uploaded public-inbox to > > > Debian. The required review process by the ftp team was completed very > > > quickly and the public-inbox package already landed in Debian sid. > > > > Awesome, thank you. I guess the next release (bullseye) is > > starting to freeze. > > For bullseye it's already too late, see > https://release.debian.org/bullseye/freeze_policy.html#soft Ah, no worries. Maybe backports if there's demand (though 1.7 will support distro-agnostic "make install-symlinks" for non-root users) > > I've been trying to get a new release out ASAP but there's too > > much left to do :< > > > > > https://tracker.debian.org/news/1234849/accepted-public-inbox-160-1-all-source-into-unstable-unstable/ > > > > Any particular reason the package is 1.6.0-1 despite the > > > > "* Include changes from upstream bugfix release 1.6.1" > > > > change entry? Anyways, no big deal and thanks again for all > > your work. > > Funny you ask. I chose to do it that way because I expected that an > eventual 1.7.0 release won't include 1.6.1 as an ancestor and I thought > it a good idea to have my upstream branch to be fast-forward only. Actually, I merged 1.6.1 back into the tip of whatever branch I was using and pushed it to master: d49c0789d208e66121bfb68ff0c48d7612a7cd8e ("Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/lei' into eidx") 8862c33ae93eea1af6246cd3c7a81e0a122186bf ("Merge tag 'v1.6.1' into eidx") > Just before seeing your mail I already asked around for a nicer > solution in the corresponding Debian irc channel, maybe I just have to > accept a non-ff upstream branch. Shouldn't be a big deal. > > Your mail is just another confirmation that the currently used scheme is > a bad idea. (Another is that the packaging page[1] nags that there is > another upstream release that should be packaged.) Right, no big deal. Btw, since there's bb928d88ed4c72241a8d76bc792cdbd798e44470 ("www: use PublicInbox::WwwStream") sitting in the stable-1.6 branch, would it be helpful to release v1.6.2 at some point? I think 8b39c0757a7d6d62ff7f432c13ef4c497f1c804e ("ds: import croak properly") is worth pushing to stable-1.6, maybe others... Also, I'd appreciate if you or anybody else helps writing release notes (in the form of what's in Documentation/RelNotes/) since it's a bit of a drag for me. > [1] https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/public-inbox