Not really sure if my previous e-mail got through.
I just discovered linssid and took a look at the packaging and I can see
many places where one can improve it (at least on the packaging front).
In light of this, are patches wanted?
The project doesn't seem to have a git tree (or I missed something). Having
one would really make things easier. Failing that, I can send patches in
the format that git format-patch generates, which would be good to keep
track of authorship/credits.
My motivation is to have one tool like inssider included in Debian proper.
Help is welcome. So far LinSSID is the work of just one person – me. I am definitely not an expert on packaging for Debian systems. If you have some better ideas then please let me know what they are. I have not created a git tree, so far, because the only developer has been me and so there has been no value in doing so. It seems that you are more familiar with Debian packaging than I am. I welcome your help. If you would like to help then I will create some sort of shared development capability, perhaps a git tree.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
First of all, sorry for not replying earlier, but I did not receive any notification via e-mail.
I do have some patches and after using the program for a while, I saw that it has some problems, like some information leak (more details later).
Having a git repository is always an incentive for potential contributors (see the success of github: the first thing that you see is the source tree of the project and the list of recent changes is just a click away).
Anyway, it is usually regarded as best if upstream and distribution packaging are maintained separately (e.g., in different branches).
I will send you some patches here, so that you can see them.
Regards,
Rogério.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
You may have noticed there's a new release 2.1 posted last night.
Yes, I noticed the information leak while testing the new version and
immediately fixed it. Ouch.
—W—
On 06/23/2013 03:53 PM, "Rogério Theodoro de Brito" wrote:
Hi, Warren.
First of all, sorry for not replying earlier, but I did not receive
any notification via e-mail.
I do have some patches and after using the program for a while, I saw
that it has some problems, like some information leak (more details
later).
Having a git repository is always an incentive for potential
contributors (see the success of github: the first thing that you see
is the source tree of the project and the list of recent changes is
just a click away).
Anyway, it is usually regarded as best if upstream and distribution
packaging are maintained separately (e.g., in different branches).
I will send you some patches here, so that you can see them.
I also vote for creating github project for the code, I have some ideas about improvement as well, so it is much easier to do this via the github. You can also contact me for any questions related to github.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
So far I've been avoiding unnecessary complexity. However, if there are folks who want to contribute then so much the better. I will investigate revision control software schemes. Git seems to be the leader. I'll get back to you on this in a couple days after I've done more homework.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I think using source control is always decrease complexity, and in open source world this is the best way to do the development. Now, with things like Github all source management became very simple and user friendly.
Actually, sourceforge also propose git repo, but if you decide to move on with git I suggest github. You can proceed to post source tarballs and packages here, but all source commits and patches from community will be tracked there.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
So, what about version control? How can an open source project live in 2015 without Git or Mercurial? (Bazar, Darcs or Subversion are fine too.)
I have not created a git tree, so far, because the only developer has been me and so there has been no value in doing so.
Version control add lot of value even when working on the project alone. For example, you may find useful to be able to revert code to previous revision or binary search for bugs, and many more features. Not to mention pull requests (which, AFAIK, are supported on Sourceforge too, not only on Github).
But still no github page for the project and code.
Here you can fix it:
Sign up in github: https://github.com/signup/free
Why people insist on Gihub? It's quite convenient hosting, but Sourceforge can also be the way to go, you can just add a repo and put there all existing versions. Otherwise, this SF project has to be properly moved to Githum, as there is no sense maintaining the project in two places.
Also, you should neither ship whole Qwt source tree with your package, not put it to Git repository.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Not really sure if my previous e-mail got through.
I just discovered linssid and took a look at the packaging and I can see
many places where one can improve it (at least on the packaging front).
In light of this, are patches wanted?
The project doesn't seem to have a git tree (or I missed something). Having
one would really make things easier. Failing that, I can send patches in
the format that
git format-patchgenerates, which would be good to keeptrack of authorship/credits.
My motivation is to have one tool like inssider included in Debian proper.
Regards,
--
Rogério Brito : rbrito@{ime.usp.br,gmail.com} : GPG key 4096R/BCFCAAAA
http://cynic.cc/blog/ : github.com/rbrito : profiles.google.com/rbrito
DebianQA: http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rbrito%40ime.usp.br
Hello, Rogério,
Help is welcome. So far LinSSID is the work of just one person – me. I am definitely not an expert on packaging for Debian systems. If you have some better ideas then please let me know what they are. I have not created a git tree, so far, because the only developer has been me and so there has been no value in doing so. It seems that you are more familiar with Debian packaging than I am. I welcome your help. If you would like to help then I will create some sort of shared development capability, perhaps a git tree.
Hi, Warren.
First of all, sorry for not replying earlier, but I did not receive any notification via e-mail.
I do have some patches and after using the program for a while, I saw that it has some problems, like some information leak (more details later).
Having a git repository is always an incentive for potential contributors (see the success of github: the first thing that you see is the source tree of the project and the list of recent changes is just a click away).
Anyway, it is usually regarded as best if upstream and distribution packaging are maintained separately (e.g., in different branches).
I will send you some patches here, so that you can see them.
Regards,
Rogério.
You may have noticed there's a new release 2.1 posted last night.
Yes, I noticed the information leak while testing the new version and
immediately fixed it. Ouch.
—W—
On 06/23/2013 03:53 PM, "Rogério Theodoro de Brito" wrote:
But still no github page for the project and code.
Here you can fix it:
Sign up in github:
https://github.com/signup/free
Start using and set up git (if you haven't still):
https://help.github.com/articles/set-up-git
Create a repository for project:
https://help.github.com/articles/create-a-repo
Commit and push your code frequently so everyone can learn the code and help you to fix problems:
http://zrusin.blogspot.com/2007/09/git-cheat-sheet.html
In github you can also have wiki page, bug tracker, patch tracker. It is very easy to accept user patches and merge another users forks.
And the best part: you don't have to use this crappy webpage:
I also vote for creating github project for the code, I have some ideas about improvement as well, so it is much easier to do this via the github. You can also contact me for any questions related to github.
So far I've been avoiding unnecessary complexity. However, if there are folks who want to contribute then so much the better. I will investigate revision control software schemes. Git seems to be the leader. I'll get back to you on this in a couple days after I've done more homework.
I think using source control is always decrease complexity, and in open source world this is the best way to do the development. Now, with things like Github all source management became very simple and user friendly.
Actually, sourceforge also propose git repo, but if you decide to move on with git I suggest github. You can proceed to post source tarballs and packages here, but all source commits and patches from community will be tracked there.
So, what about version control? How can an open source project live in 2015 without Git or Mercurial? (Bazar, Darcs or Subversion are fine too.)
Version control add lot of value even when working on the project alone. For example, you may find useful to be able to revert code to previous revision or binary search for bugs, and many more features. Not to mention pull requests (which, AFAIK, are supported on Sourceforge too, not only on Github).
Why people insist on Gihub? It's quite convenient hosting, but Sourceforge can also be the way to go, you can just add a repo and put there all existing versions. Otherwise, this SF project has to be properly moved to Githum, as there is no sense maintaining the project in two places.
Also, you should neither ship whole Qwt source tree with your package, not put it to Git repository.
Any updates on the topic. The source tarball is not compilable on my fedora. Having git repository will simplify patchwork.
https://github.com/rezso/ub/blob/master/linssid/patches/qt5.4.patch
HTH.