Re: [GNU-linux-libre] NONFSDG: Audacious plugins, Xchat

[Karl Goetz]

On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 21:40:42 +0200
Sam Geeraerts <address@hidden> wrote:

> Karl Goetz wrote:
> > On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 10:39:01 +0200
> > jaromil <address@hidden> wrote:
> > 
> >> hi Karl,
> >>
> >>> On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 10:10:44 +0200 jaromil <address@hidden>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> one solution i see is just provide a .patch for the upstream code
> >>>> and leave distro developers and mantainers apply it every time
> >>>> they make a new release: a minimal, short term solution.
> >> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 08:36:35PM +0930, Karl Goetz wrote:
> >>> Not really. its /the/ solution if upstream doesn't want to accept
> >>> the patch.  One of the big problems with this is different distros
> >>> with different versions of applications trying to use the same
> >>> patches as code evolves.
> >> ACK. so i should include in the steps outlined the first one:
> >> propose the patch to upstream.
> >>
> >> is there a page resuming a short "what to do" when trying to
> >> liberate software packages?
> > 
> > No, but I think there should be one :) (on libreplanet ?).
> 
> Indeed. A common generic procedure could make distro development and 
> communication between distros easier. How about this to start with:

looks good, but i'd rearrange it like this:

> * Identify the problem.
> * Contact gnu-linux-libre list.
> * Report a bug upstream.
> * Add to NONFSDG list with link to upstream and distro bug reports
> * Create a patch.
> * Publish the patch; send a copy to gnu-linux-libre and a copy to
> upstreams bts.
> * Apply careful diplomacy to upstream to accept the patch.
> 
> YMMV, depending on the sort of problem.

and the level of life in upstream :)

> >>>> upstream development of software: builds at every new commit and
> >>>> reports failure on building on various platforms (via mail or
> >>>> irc), ATM we have 32 and 64 bit debian, fedora, gentoo and
> >>>> ubuntu.
> >>> I've thought about such things for various projects im involved
> >>> in, but maintaining it and debugging requires much
> >>> time/effort/skill then i have to hand.
> >> of course this is a task for sysadmins with time at hand.  and we
> >> know
> > 
> > Not just sysadmins, thats the problem. it requires developer input
> > every time a package build fails. (otherwise, what was the point of
> > the build?)
> 
> For just our patched packages it seems manageable. To take 

managable, yes. but this started as 'builds at every new commit' - a
very different story.

> responsibility for a whole (or even multiple) distro repo we'd need a 
> few more people, I figure. :)

Perhaps, depends how different the software we are working on is.

> >> buildbot its kind of one one could see it as a "launchpad" for
> >> linux-libre..  ..without having to sign silly contracts and be
> >> called "ubuntero" :) and most importantly based on more
> >> distributions, not just ubuntu, but all those platforms adopted by
> >> libre distros here.
> > 
> > I like the vision, I just don't feel i'll be able to contribute as
> > much as i'd like.
> 
> Would the vision require a big bang complete setup or could we slowly 
> start with a proof of concept (e.g. the patch set in VCS or build
> only one of the packages) and grow from there?

Starting small would be starting it with one or two distros - something
reasonable imo.
kk

-- 
Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK5FOSS)
Debian contributor / gNewSense Maintainer
http://www.kgoetz.id.au
No, I won't join your social networking group

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature