[Pkg-clamav-devel] Adopting havp into pkg-clamav

[Scott Kitterman]

On Saturday, July 19, 2014 11:25:38 Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Thursday, July 17, 2014 00:26:09 Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On 08.07.2014 21:00, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > > On 2014-07-07 00:44:48 [-0400], Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > >> It looks like havp is rather undermaintained, but wouldn't take a lot
> > >> of
> > >> work to get it back into testing.  Would anyone be willing to help out
> > >> if I adopt it into the team (I'll contact the existing maintainer
> > >> first,
> > >> I haven't done that yet)?
> > > 
> > > Clamav seems quiet now and there isn't anything important on the list,
> > > right? So in that case I might help out if the other clamav related
> > > package are good to go.
> > 
> > Given that havp is related to clamav, I'm not opposed adopting it into
> > the team, ...
> > 
> > > BUT before you go and adopt it, please make sure that it is really worth
> > > it. c-icap has a clamav plugin but uses the ICAP protocol (whatever that
> > > is) so it might not be a replacement for havp.
> > > Dansguardian on the other hand seems to do the same thing as havp (on
> > > the first look).
> > > The upstream of both project looks kind of dead. Last release in 2010
> > > for havp vs an alpha release in 2012 for dansguardian.
> > 
> > ... however, these seem to be valid concerns.
> > 
> > Also havp hasn't been really popular with at maximum 160 popcon
> > submitters back in 2010 [1]. Currently 100 remain, although that might
> > grow again (fast?), if havp gets into stable.
> > 
> > But if you think it worthwhile, I can help with fixing the RC-bugs.
> 
> Thanks.  It is sometimes hard to tell when a project is abandoned vice
> mature. When the issue came up about the libclamav initialization change in
> 0.98.4, the havp upstream was active on the clamav list and said he'd do a
> new release if needed.  I don't think it's dead.
> 
> I decided to go ahead with this and mailed the maintainer to see if they are
> willing to give it up.  It does not appear he's active any Debian anymore
> so I expect either no response or agreement.
> 
> I think dansguardian is worth looking into as well.

The dansguardian maintainer is still very active in Debian and it also has a 
lot of non-clamav related functionality, so I think we should leave that one 
alone.

I heard back from the havp maintainer and he's glad to have us take it over.

I'll work on it next week if no one else does.  My thought is to first work  
out the RC bugs.

Scott K