[Pkg-rust-maintainers] Bootstrap of rust

[Sylvestre Ledru]

On 21/01/2015 21:59, Jordan Justen wrote:
> On 2015-01-21 08:22:42, Luca Bruno wrote:
>> On Wednesday 21 January 2015 09:40:20 Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
>>
>>>> It will download the stage0 snapshots and generate
>>>> ../rust_$VERSION.orig-dl.tar.gz.
>>>>
>>>> It appears to be working, so I deleted debian/dl.
>>> Hmm, what is the goal of this? Builder don't have access to the network ?!
>>> If you want this for the maintainer before the upload, please add a new
>>> target to debian/rules
>> Yes, that should be for the uploader to assemble all the pieces.
>> Just for reference, by policy this is usually a "get-orig-source" target in 
>> rules: https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html
>>
>> Seems to be working fine, but the version looks funky (where the "0" before 
>> alpha comes from?).
>> I'd just retargeted it to experimental (so we don't have to fear if we make 
>> major screwups),
> I had been told by another DD that experimental doesn't really make
> sense for 'new' packages. I was told it was useful for newer versions
> of a package to make sure it did not break existing users of the
> package.
There are different interpretations.
With the freeze, new packages won't be migrating to testing. So, in this
case,
unstable would be fine but if Luca prefers to go with experimental, I am
happy too.

>
>> and removed the 0 before alpha. Feel free to re-add it if 
>> there is a rationale I missed.
> I added that. I just wanted us to have control of the versions since
> 'alpha' is not a number.
>
> Likely, then will next release 1.0.0~beta, which will be greater than
> 1.0.0~alpha, but with the 0, we could for certain have control over
> it.
>
> Anyway, I think my concern with alpha is not too likely to be an
> issue, so I don't mind your change to plain alpha.
>
>>>> I suppose, since there hasn't been an upload yet, we might consider
>>>> nuking debian/dl in the history and doing a force push. This should
>>>> allow git gc to reclaim the stage0 binary space from the git repo.
>>> If you want go ahead, but not sure that 40M is a big deal.
>> I think we have to anyway organize the repo later (maybe DEP14?), so we can 
>> postpone this and declare a force-push day in some time.
> I don't think we should force push after the first upload.
>
> And, I'm wondering when you guys think you'll try to do the first
> upload? My experience with the new queue is 3+ months, and I think
> rust 1.0.0 might be out before then.
>
> http://blog.rust-lang.org/2014/12/12/1.0-Timeline.html
>
Yes, I agree. I mentioned that to Luca today and I think we should
upload it asap.
Luca is going to do some reviews/checks.
I fixed most of the lintian warnings. There are still a few but we can
live with them for now.

Cheers,
Sylvestre