[Aptitude-devel] Bug#497206: Aptitude wishlist bug with a package - how to get it merged?

Sun Sep 13 00:35:22 UTC 2015

On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 02:02:48AM +0100, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> (replying to both messages at bottom...)
> 
> 
> 2010-07-08 23:29 Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo:
> >Hello, Daniel.
> >
> >I've submitted bug 497206 for aptitude with a patch attached almost two
> >years ago.  It's a new feature, to allow packages to be grouped by
> >source. It's usually easier to upgrade all packages from the same
> >source, without having to look for (and sometimes guess) what are the
> >other packages from that given source package.
> >
> >At that time, I've got some feedback (my first implementation required a
> >change to apt), and have responded with another patch. I've been missing
> >some aptitude upgrades or rebuilding it ever since.
> >
> >This is a simple patch, since it looks like very much other code already
> >in aptitude to group packages by other criteria. I know aptitude has
> >lots of reported bugs and maintaining it must really take a lot of time.
> >
> >I would like to know what I can do to help get this merged.
> >Unfortunately, I cannot commit to co-maintain aptitude. But I could help
> >fixing any bugs that arise from my patch and those come to my knowledge
> >(perhaps, I should subscribe for the aptitude bug list for a while).
> >
> >At last, I would like to thank you for developing and maintaining this
> >great software.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Cascardo.
> 
> 
> 2010-07-18 13:23 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh:
> >On Thu, 08 Jul 2010, Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo wrote:
> >>I've submitted bug 497206 for aptitude with a patch attached almost two
> >>years ago.  It's a new feature, to allow packages to be grouped by
> >>source. It's usually easier to upgrade all packages from the same
> >>source, without having to look for (and sometimes guess) what are the
> >>other packages from that given source package.
> >
> >Hmm, wishlist seconded, FWLIW.
> >
> >Grouping by source package is a feature that would help me when I know
> >for sure something is broken in unstable and the entire set of binary
> >packages from the same source needs to be put in hold...
> 
> Thanks for working and providing this patch, refreshing it and insisting
> for a long time :-)
> 
> For some reason, Daniel Burrows at the time decided not to merge the
> part creating the Source View:
> 
>  https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/aptitude/aptitude.git/commit/?id=66adb6c872f7b49279da43601e7d3ff199996c1a
> 
>  Add a new "source" grouping policy, which groups packages according to
>  their source package.
> 
>  Closes: #497206; thanks to Thadeu Lima de Sourza Cascardo for the
>  patch.
> 
>  Didn't merge the part of the patch that adds an entry to the Views
>  menu, as I don't personally believe that this grouping needs its own
>  entry there.
> 
> 
> With the new grouping policy merged, probably you were already making
> use of this feature in some way to browse the packages.
> 
> But for a long time I thought that some sort of package view would be
> useful for other purposes, e.g. to see all binary packages provided by a
> library and install also the documentation if it was available, rather
> than hop around the package list in other ways.  (search and filtering
> works sometimes, but if the package names do not match expectations,
> it's a hassle).
> 
> Another use is to selectively upgrade all packages coming from the same
> source (e.g. util-linux, many binaries and difficult to find because
> they have very disparate names), while keeping the rest of the system in
> the same state.
> 
> Anyway, the point is that I do find it an useful addition, so I decided
> to also create a source view, it will be included in the next release.
> 
> Since I found the view that you had submitted a bit flat / unappealing
> (maybe that's also why Daniel Burrows didn't like it much), I expanded
> the grouping "firstchar" to also be able to use source names rather than
> binary names, and to also add the top section (e.g. "main").  So the
> resulting view looks a bit like browsing the FTP, some feature that I
> missed sometimes when working on ports (porters think much more in terms
> of source packages than most of the rest of Debian users and devels, I
> think).
> 
> Anyway, this is an example, limiting the view to the packages matching
> "dpkg" and expanding some subtrees, I hope that you like it.
> 
> 
>  --\ main - The main Debian archive (21)
>    --\ a (1)
>      --- apt-dpkg-ref (1)
>    --\ d (12)
>      --\ dpkg (6)
>  i     dpkg                  1.18.2         1.18.2
>  p     dpkg:i386             <none>         1.18.2
>  i     dpkg-dev              1.18.2         1.18.2
>  p     libdpkg-dev           <none>         1.18.2
>  p     libdpkg-dev:i386      <none>         1.18.2
>  i A   libdpkg-perl          1.18.2         1.18.2
>      --- dpkg-awk (1)
>      --- dpkg-cross (2)
>      --- dpkg-repack (1)
>      --- dpkg-sig (1)
>      --- dpkg-www (1)
>    --\ e (1)
>      --- emacs-goodies-el (1)
>    --\ h (5)
>      --- haskell-dpkg (5)
>    --\ libc (1)
>      --- libconfig-model-dpkg-perl (1)
>    --\ libd (1)
>      --- libdpkg-log-perl (1)
> 
> Cheers.
> -- 
> Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo <manuel.montezelo at gmail.com>

I have been basically using default grouping as status,source for as
long as I can remember on all of the systems I need to take care of.

I appreciate that you moved it further, I will try that view when I get
the chance. For me, grouping by firstchar makes more sense than grouping
by section, since when you do that, you lose the source grouping, as
binary packages from the same source may belong to different sections.

Regards.
Cascardo.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/aptitude-devel/attachments/20150912/28082389/attachment.sig>