Mailing List Archive: SPF: Devel

Making progress on Ubuntu packaging...

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

scott at kitterman

Jan 5, 2007, 9:28 PM

Post #1 of 4 (1254 views)
Permalink

Making progress on Ubuntu packaging...

As previously mentioned the current pyspf release (2.0.1) was accepted for
Ubuntu Feisty (scheduled for release in April):

https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pyspf/2.0.1-0ubuntu1

I've started working on getting Julian's PERL Mail::SPF accepted too. It has
some dependencies that need to be worked. I got those done today:

https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/feisty/+source/libnetaddr-ip-perl/4.004-0ubuntu1

Julian's new libnet-dns-resolver-programmable-perl has been accepted, but
because it's an entirely new package, has to go through additional review
before being added to the distribution.

The summary is here:

https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-kitterman/+packages

Once libnet-dns-resolver-programmable-perl is in the distribution, then
mail-spf-perl will build and can be ben considered. I asked how long that
takes and got various versions of forever as a response. We'll see.

mail-spf-perl has been submitted. See:

http://revu.tauware.de/details.py?upid=3978

for details. As I understand it, that's where it sits until we get
libnet-dns-resolver-programmable-perl added.

BTW, Julian, I was asked to ask upstream for both
libnet-dns-resolver-programmable-perl and mail-spf-perl to remove the debian
folder from your next release. Ubuntu is not a fan of the practice. Quote
from IRC today, "It's not the Debian Way". I was tempted to reply that
there's more than one way to do it, but since Ubuntu is Python focused, I
decided not to get myself ejected from the channel.

So, they said to ask. I've asked. It's not stopping anything from getting
released. See:

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Packages/CommonPackagingMistakes/ChangingTheOrigTarball?action=show&redirect=CommonPackagingMistakes%2FChangingTheOrigTarball

or

http://tinyurl.com/ygd859

and scroll down to "What to do with .orig.tar.gz which already include a
debian/ dir?".

Thanks.

Ubuntu already gets libmail-spf-query-perl synched from Debian with no
problem:

https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libmail-spf-query-perl

There are a number of SPF related packages in Ubuntu:

https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+search?text=spf

Now that I can upload stuff there, if anyone has upstream updates that aren't
packaged yet, please let me know and I'll see what I can do.

Scott K

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=1007

julian at mehnle

Jan 6, 2007, 4:15 AM

Post #2 of 4 (1168 views)
Permalink

Re: Making progress on Ubuntu packaging... [In reply to]

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

Scott Kitterman wrote:
> As previously mentioned the current pyspf release (2.0.1) was accepted
> for Ubuntu Feisty (scheduled for release in April):
>
> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pyspf/2.0.1-0ubuntu1

Very good!

> I've started working on getting Julian's PERL Mail::SPF accepted too.
> [...]

Thanks for your efforts, I appreciate them. Now I just need to work on
getting the same stuff into Debian proper... Bureaucracy. *sigh*

> BTW, Julian, I was asked to ask upstream for both
> libnet-dns-resolver-programmable-perl and mail-spf-perl to remove the
> debian folder from your next release. Ubuntu is not a fan of the
> practice. Quote from IRC today, "It's not the Debian Way". I was
> tempted to reply that there's more than one way to do it, but since
> Ubuntu is Python focused, I decided not to get myself ejected from the
> channel.

I have recently gotten this request with regard to another CPAN package of
mine from a Debian packager, too. However, I have pondered this exten-
sively in the past and this will not happen. It may make sense from a
selfish Debian/Ubuntu distribution packaging point of view, but it does
not make any sense whatsoever from an upstream point of view.

There is a conceptual difference between the Debian package management
system (dpkg) and the official Debian and Ubuntu package repositories.
They are not synonymous. There is a world beyond those official package
repos, and I as an upstream author want to cater to that world. For
example, I want someone to be able to download one of my Perl modules from
CPAN and build a Debian package easily instead of having to bypass dpkg
and install the package manually via the CPAN tool just because it isn't
available from the official Debian/Ubuntu repos yet.

If the maintainers of the official Debian and Ubuntu repos do not like the
debian/ dirs I have prepared and am shipping in my upstream packages, they
are free to repackage the packages and remove those dirs. (Although, I
don't see what's bad about re-using them and just making the desired
modifications to them. Perhaps once again this is just an issue of
needing better tools? But as I said, the issue is really irrelevant from
an upstream PoV.)

> Ubuntu already gets libmail-spf-query-perl synched from Debian with no
> problem:

Good to see 1:1.999.1-3 in Ubuntu. That release has the update-
alternatives support so it can coexist with spf-tools-perl (the Mail::SPF-
based spfquery and spfd package).

Again, thanks for your package preparation, uploading, and coordination
work!

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFn5LNwL7PKlBZWjsRAqQUAKD04BFjAIeeDswvOakYY3SQePeTAwCeLxQg
k8N97GnQ6yEi/4a39rNytVo=
=GXhh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=1007

scott at kitterman

Jan 6, 2007, 8:56 AM

Post #3 of 4 (1166 views)
Permalink

Re: Re: Making progress on Ubuntu packaging... [In reply to]

On Saturday 06 January 2007 07:15, Julian Mehnle wrote:
> Scott Kitterman wrote:

> > BTW, Julian, I was asked to ask upstream for both
> > libnet-dns-resolver-programmable-perl and mail-spf-perl to remove the
> > debian folder from your next release. Ubuntu is not a fan of the
> > practice. Quote from IRC today, "It's not the Debian Way". I was
> > tempted to reply that there's more than one way to do it, but since
> > Ubuntu is Python focused, I decided not to get myself ejected from the
> > channel.
>
> I have recently gotten this request with regard to another CPAN package of
> mine from a Debian packager, too. However, I have pondered this exten-
> sively in the past and this will not happen. It may make sense from a
> selfish Debian/Ubuntu distribution packaging point of view, but it does
> not make any sense whatsoever from an upstream point of view.
>
> There is a conceptual difference between the Debian package management
> system (dpkg) and the official Debian and Ubuntu package repositories.
> They are not synonymous. There is a world beyond those official package
> repos, and I as an upstream author want to cater to that world. For
> example, I want someone to be able to download one of my Perl modules from
> CPAN and build a Debian package easily instead of having to bypass dpkg
> and install the package manually via the CPAN tool just because it isn't
> available from the official Debian/Ubuntu repos yet.
>
> If the maintainers of the official Debian and Ubuntu repos do not like the
> debian/ dirs I have prepared and am shipping in my upstream packages, they
> are free to repackage the packages and remove those dirs. (Although, I
> don't see what's bad about re-using them and just making the desired
> modifications to them. Perhaps once again this is just an issue of
> needing better tools? But as I said, the issue is really irrelevant from
> an upstream PoV.)
>
No problem. They said ask. I asked. Thanks for the explanation.

Question: For the initial Ubuntu release I just added the Ubuntu specific
packaging changes to debian/changes. No problem. When I go to update the
packages for a new upstream release, I think I need to build off of
debian/changes from the Ubuntu release and replace the debian/changes you
provide with it. Does that sound right?

Scott K

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=1007

julian at mehnle

Jan 6, 2007, 9:43 AM

Post #4 of 4 (1168 views)
Permalink

Re: Making progress on Ubuntu packaging... [In reply to]

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

Scott Kitterman wrote:
> Question: For the initial Ubuntu release I just added the Ubuntu
> specific packaging changes to debian/changes. No problem. When I go to
> update the packages for a new upstream release, I think I need to build
> off of debian/changes from the Ubuntu release and replace the
> debian/changes you provide with it. Does that sound right?

Basically, that sounds right. In my position as one of the Debian
maintainers of the libmail-spf-query-perl package (within the Debian Perl
Group, which consists of both DDs and non-DDs like me), I have been sort
of "merging" the changelogs by adding new text from the upstream changelog
to the existing Debian changelog. So technically, yes, I use the Debian
changelog instead of the upstream one.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFn9/IwL7PKlBZWjsRAjGYAKD3PwTsJu7Ib+2oTkvRQSmw2fbnIACg1p3s
AWzVdWjfAt4IRPFSe06glyA=
=zFW6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=1007

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads