Re: [Opensync-devel] [codehelp@debian.org: Status of opensync in Debian - mass removal very likely]

SourceForge Headquarters 1320 Columbia Street Suite 310 San Diego, CA 92101 +1 (858) 422-6466

On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 05:57:10AM -0500, Chris Frey wrote:
> Thanks Harald.

Hi Chris

> 
> I've responded, which can be read here:
> 
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/03/msg00104.html

Yep sorry I did not realise this earlier

> 
> Opensync might not make it into Debian.  But I am planning a separate
> apt-get repo for opensync and some of the plugins.  So Opensync users
> won't be completely left out in the cold.

Well did you talk with some DD's? Maybe there would be an interest in a
least keeping in experimental for those you are brave enough. If you
really plan on making a private repo I could help you making the
packages as Debian compliant as possible so a potential future packager
might have no problems in reintegrating it (multiarch-compliant,
hardening, etc).

> 
> - Chris

Kind regards
Harald

> 
> 
> On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 09:11:58AM +0100, Harald Jenny wrote:
> > Dear opensync folks,
> > 
> > I guess this may be of interest for you - if you are interested in
> > keeping opensync in Debian I would ask you to get in contact with the
> > maintainers (http://packages.qa.debian.org/o/opensync.html).
> > 
> > Kind regards
> > Harald Jenny
> > 
> > ----- Forwarded message from Neil Williams <cod...@de...> -----
> > 
> > Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 23:15:16 +0000
> > From: Neil Williams <cod...@de...>
> > To: deb...@li...
> > Cc: Robert Collins <ro...@ro...>, Michael Banck <mb...@de...>, Matthias Jahn <jah...@fr...>, Jonny Lamb <jo...@de...>
> > Subject: Status of opensync in Debian - mass removal very likely
> > X-Local-Spam-Level: 
> > X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.2.0beta5 (GTK+ 2.24.10; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
> > 
> > opensync/multisync is a complete mess, collecting 25 RC bugs between 20
> > source packages and a collective 17,626 days waiting to enter testing.
> > dd-list attached.
> > 
> > Summary:
> > libopensync-plugin-gnokii	1462 days old (needed 10 days)	libopensync0	RC x 2
> > libopensync-plugin-gpe		1462 days old (needed 10 days)	libopensync0	RC x 2
> > libopensync-plugin-irmc		976 days old (needed 10 days)	libopensync0	RC
> > libopensync-plugin-kdepim	1025 days old (needed 10 days)	libopensync0	RC
> > libopensync-plugin-moto		1207 days old (needed 10 days)	libopensync0	RC x 2
> > libopensync-plugin-opie		1190 days old (needed 10 days)	libopensync0	RC x 2
> > libopensync-plugin-palm		1461 days old (needed 10 days)	libopensync0	RC x 2
> > libopensync-plugin-python	1347 days old (needed 10 days)	libopensync0	RC x 2
> > libopensync-plugin-sunbird	1456 days old (needed 10 days)	libopensync0	RC x 2
> > osynctool			765 days old (needed 10 days)	RC
> > opensync			663 days old (needed 10 days)	RC x 3
> > libopensync-plugin-xmlformat	754 days old (needed 10 days)	opensync
> > libopensync-plugin-vformat	768 days old (needed 10 days)	opensync
> > libopensync-plugin-syncml	755 days old (needed 10 days)	opensync
> > libopensync-plugin-file		755 days old (needed 10 days)	opensync
> > libopensync-plugin-evolution2	755 days old (needed 10 days)	libcamel-1.2-23 et al
> > multisync0.90			825 days old (needed 10 days)	libopensync0	RC x 2
> > synce-sync-engine		depends opensync, libopensync-plugin-python
> > libopensync-plugin-google-calendar	libopensync0 (experimental) RC x 3
> > synce-kpm				depends on synce-sync-engine
> > 
> > Most depend on libopensync0 which does not exist anymore, those which
> > have been updated are split between libopensync1exp3 and
> > libopensync1exp7. libopensync1exp3 does not exist, libopensync1exp7 has
> > 3 RC bugs.
> > 
> > If there's no response (I'm NOT expecting fixes, just *some* idea of
> > whether these RC bugs *can* be fixed and all the packages migrated to
> > whatever counts as the latest available libopensync version), ALL of
> > these packages will have to be removed. I'm afraid it's SO unlikely
> > that anything is going to be truly fixed by Wheezy, the only real
> > option for a deadline is 7 days to get *SOME* kind of expression of
> > interest, some idea of a plan. Naturally, if the maintainers wish to
> > file the removal bugs themselves, that would be appreciated.
> > 
> > I know all of these have already been removed from testing, but the
> > packages in unstable are completely unusable / not installable. Just
> > leaving RC bugs in unstable for years should not be acceptable.
> > 
> > There are packages in experimental too but those appear to be gathering RC
> > bugs as well, so I'll also file removal bugs for those.
> > 
> > -- 
> > 
> > 
> > Neil Williams
> > =============
> > http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ----- End forwarded message -----
> > 
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Try before you buy = See our experts in action!
> > The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
> > is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
> > Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2
> > _______________________________________________
> > Opensync-devel mailing list
> > Ope...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensync-devel