[TWiki-Dev] Re: TWiki Debian Package State

[<ei...@th...>]

The biggest thing to resolve is probably "port the postinst to perl,
so that you can combine debconf and apache-reconfig" which, due to the
way debconf-in-sh takes over file descriptors, is currently
impossible.  The next thing would be to clean up the password
mechanism, or integrate it better with something real (pubcookie,
ssl+certs, etc.)

> Are there Debian developers who would be willing to help out with (via
> research and discussion) some of these packaging problems?  If not,

I suggest, given the nature of the specific issues, that the
debian-apache list might be appropriate, but I'm a bit behind on it.

> these issues are addressed someone can do an NMU?

I'd certainly encourange any NMU that fixed things; truly, most of the
reason to get the current upload in place was to get a version out
there that had *some* of the hard packaging problems fixed, in the
hope that it could get debugged into a more useful state (since so
many people contacted me about getting even that much out the door.)

Just a quick look at the bugs that are there:

163514, 165340 - same bug, "how do I build-depend on a uid?"  Generic
   question, answer may be "get it in base-passwd" which seems poor.
   In any case, neither supplies a patch.  You'd think some other
   debian package has this problem, even just finding one and pointing
   out how they dealt would be useful.

151187 - that's easy, an NMU could just fix it.
151188 - that's fixed already, I think
152479 - hmm, most of that's odd user config, but a fix *is* possible,
   I just don't appear to have managed to put it together; another
   good NMU one (ie. if you understand it well enough to fix, you're
   certainly ready to take it over :-)
152515, 152516 - upstream, just need to do the research to see if it is fixed
152766 - upstream 
153168 - need to evaluate before proposing it upstream
153430 - structural packaging change; if you make the suggested change
   and it works, including on a clean install, great, NMU
163344 - the user reg issue mentioned above
149319 - not a bug, though if someone wants to get it to use cgiwrap,
   they're welcome to *if they take it over*; ie. read and understand
   the thread here, and still think cgiwrap is the right answer and
   succeed in making it work, great, it's yours - but don't do it just
   as an NMU, since it isn't broken now.