[Pkg-electronics-devel] Reviving the fped package in Debian

[Paul Boddie]

On Sunday 30. June 2019 21.56.32 Carsten Schoenert wrote:
> > 
> > These files have been moved to the following location:
> > 
> > https://github.com/xiangfu/deb-pkg/tree/master/fped
> > 
> > (I am not completely sure that the location is fully compatible with the
> > Debian infrastructure tools, though.)
> 
> this repo seems to only contain some files that are used in the debian/
> folder somewhere. This repo isn't really useful for anything.

I cannot agree with that: I took the contents of the fped directory, put it in 
a debian directory, adjusted a few things that don't really affect building 
(such as the control, changelog, copyright files) and built a new package.

I may have misunderstood your assessment, though. :-)

> If the source isn't really available anymore in the big world wide web
> we have to live with the existing source tarball. I believe the source
> can now be found here:
> 
> http://projects.qi-hardware.com/index.php/p/fped/source/tree/master/
> 
> But this repository has not tags or releases. You might want to contact
> also Werner Almesberger to get further information on this.

Yes, this repository is referenced in the Vcs-Git field, but my interpretation 
is that this field should be used to reference the packaging files, not the 
actual software, with the latter being referenced elsewhere (the watch file, 
perhaps).

This is why the following QA error occurs:

https://qa.debian.org/cgi-bin/vcswatch?package=fped

> > Since some people are still using fped in their projects, it might be nice
> > to provide an updated version in Debian. So far, I have looked into doing
> > the> 
> > following:
> >  * Updating the control, copyright (and compat, source/format) files
> >  * Incorporating the patch provided in bug #928321 [*] within patches
> >  * Running dpkg-buildpackage to check that the package still builds
> 
> It's absolutely o.k. to rebuild packages like fped at least once in the
> release preparation to adopt and update the packaging. So feel free to
> work on this.
> 
> > There are a few other things that might be worth doing:
> >  * Introducing a watch file, although the download archives are not
> >  
> >    particularly accessible to uscan
> 
> uscan is very flexible as long there is some url to look at something,
> given the old fped git repo isn't alive anymore adding a watch is
> depending on some new source url.

The old repository does work, though:

git://projects.qi-hardware.com/fped.git

I have cloned it and have been working out of that clone with the newer 
packaging files. But the problem may well be how to obtain release archives 
when they are made available on subpages of the links found on the downloads 
page:

http://projects.qi-hardware.com/index.php/p/fped/downloads/

Here, the source downloads are what are really needed:

http://projects.qi-hardware.com/index.php/p/fped/downloads/label/1192/

But then the first one is provided on this subpage:

http://projects.qi-hardware.com/index.php/p/fped/downloads/84/

And here is the actual download:

http://projects.qi-hardware.com/index.php/p/fped/downloads/84/get/

Maybe a bit of URL rewriting would do the trick, though.

> >  * Investigating the special changelog and clean scripts
> >  * Updating the rules to adopt current practices
> > 
> > I'm not completely sure if the original package maintainer is still
> > active, so I have copied him on this message. I have also copied the
> > original developer on this message as well.
> 
> That's always a good idea to include the original maintainer in actions
> like yours here. So you've done everything right here.

I've built on Xiangfu's work before, but I don't think we've ever been in 
contact. Thanks for all your Ben NanoNote work, Xiangfu, if you're reading!

> > I don't really want to take over maintenance of this package: I just want
> > to put it back on track within the automation provided by Debian so that
> > newer versions can eventually be provided.
> 
> Why you wont take over some maintenance? My guess is that nobody from
> the electronics team will jump in here directly nor will also take over
> the maintainer ship for this package. But I'd at least would sponsor the
> upload of an updated package if needed and appropriate.
> 
> A package like this one are easy packages to get some or more packaging
> practice, I bet this package won't ever get a new upstream version a
> year. ;)

I guess I could be mentored, or whatever the current term is for that kind of 
thing. I did participate in the Debian Mentors programme a few years ago, and 
I guess I should also dedicate some time to the package involved in that 
exercise:

https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/shedskin

My main concern is the route to getting packages uploaded together with the 
usual "tooling up" required to do things right. I find myself spread very thin 
these days.

Paul