[Pkg-samba-maint] Team maintenance for lbd/tdb/tevent/talloc?

[Christian PERRIER]

> > Jelmer, I hope you don't mind this. You are listed as the maintainer of tevent
> > (not the pkg-samba team). Would it be OK with you to move these packages to
> > the team:
> I do mind. Why the urgency? Why not bring up team maintainership *before*
> making this change? It would have been easy to get an ACK out of me.
> 
> These packages are not team maintained at the moment.

Hello Jelmer,

I should have probably sent this a bit earlier but, indeed, isn't that
the right moment to make them team-maintained and complete their move
to git?

We are at a moment where the momentum in the pkg-samba team is highly
increasing, because of the combined effects of Andrew's great work to
package a full-featured samba4, Ivo's work on svn-git conversion and
the relief that the release of wheezy has put on us for doing more
risky things.

The SambaXP week (even if only Ivo and me are there) is a great
opportunity to move on as much as we can on the path that leads to
samba4 packages in unstable.

Having the four build dependency packages also in unstable thus becomes
important. That's the reason that led me today to check where we are
wrt VCS status (see our brief IRC discussion).

- ldb: the git repo is converted from bzr but is missing last upload
to experimental and doesn't have the upstream source. In short it is
no gbp-compliant (not that this is an absolute requirement but it
helps in having common packaging methods)

- tdb : the git repo is currently empty. You mentioned me on IRC that
you have a private copy that is the conversion from bzr. If so, this
copy also has only the debian/ directory, if I'm correct. Also missing
last experimental upload

- talloc: the git repo is currently empty. The bzr repo has upstream
source and debian/

- tevent : as far as I see, there is no git repo yet


Today, I spent some time working to have git repos for ldb/tdb/talloc
that would be:
- started from the current git (or bzr)
- merged with latest uploads that were prepared by Andrew for
experimental and uploaded either by Ivo or me
- gbp compliant with upstream source imported

They're probably far from being perfect (I'm not a git expert) but at
least two of them allow building with gbp (for whatever reason ldb
fails with an error I can't understand). Some already implement what I
think we need: move to team maintenance (note that this is mostly
purely formal by setting Maintainer to the team and Uploaders to the
former maintainer and uploaders).

My proposal is to copy these git repos in
git.debian.org/git/pkg-samba,  aside from the existing ones as of now,
get advices and ack from you.....and turn them into our official
repos, then upload the 4 packages ASAP to unstable so that we can
later build samba 4.0.5, for experimental, only with packages of
unstable.

As soon as possible, I'd do the same for tevent.

I'm sorry to put pressure here but these very few days are *those*
where several of us are indeed focused on samba things and, by
experience, we'd better not miss such opportunity.

I understand this might sound as a bit offensive and even close to
some "package hijack" but I hope you give me enough credit to
understand this is of course not the intent. I just really want us to
not make the big momentum we currently have drop down and be sunk into
real life and other commitments...:-)



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-samba-maint/attachments/20130514/17ba81d0/attachment.pgp>