svn team mailing list archive

[Michael Diers <mdiers@xxxxxxxx>]

On 2010-07-01 08:57, Max Bowsher wrote:
> On 30/06/10 15:19, Michael Diers wrote:
>> On 2010-06-30 15:56, Max Bowsher wrote:
>>> On 30/06/10 13:34, Michael Diers wrote:
>>>> On 2010-06-30 10:08, Max Bowsher wrote:
>>>>> On 25/06/10 15:55, Michael Diers wrote:
>>>>>> Peter Samuelson has submitted Subversion 1.6.12dfsg-1 to Debian
>>>>>> unstable. With Peter's tweaks to the test suite, the builds on all
>>>>>> Debian platforms now look quite alright.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The package will soon transition to Debian testing and eventually get
>>>>>> collected in bzr branch lp:debian/squeeze/subversion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Before merging into lp:~svn/ubuntu/lucid/subversion/ppa, there is one
>>>>>> merge mistake from the previous sync that I'd like to fix: I managed to
>>>>>> lose the kwallet configuration switch for karmic and jaunty.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I expect to be able to do some work over the next couple of days.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Looks like you've been overrun by real life? :-)
>>>>
>>>> Max,
>>>>
>>>> not "real life", but football :) I've spent some time putting together
>>>> 1.6.12dfsg-1~bpo50+2 for Debian "lenny-backports", still looking for a
>>>> sponsor to upload it.
>>>>
>>>>> I have some time to work on this tonight, and would quite like to be
>>>>> running the newer svn locally myself.
>>>>>
>>>>> Would I be stepping on your toes if I went ahead and did this merge?
>>>>
>>>> Absolutely not. Let me just push the KWallet bits... there, at least the
>>>> "lucid" branch is there for you to merge to.
>>>
>>> Err.. I object to that revision and would like to revert it. It's a big
>>> changelog entry that is a misleading copy/paste of
>>> 1.6.9dfsg-1ubuntu0svn1 - those actions are now listed in the changelog
>>> twice, but only happened once. This is confusing!
>>>
>>> Also the commit message speaks of KWallet, when there is no
>>> kwallet-related change in that commit, nor even any kwallet-related
>>> change happening in the lucid branch at all.
>>>
>>> There's no need to introduce a new changelog entry in the lucid branch
>>> for a change touching only karmic/jaunty/hardy.
>>
>> Right. I suppose the reason I changed the lucid branch at all is that
>> the previous debian/changelog (that's revno: 46, 1.6.9dfsg-1ubuntu0svn2)
>> looked no good to me.
> 
> What looked no good about it?

Well, Launchpad presents a "(changes file)" link for the available
packages, which resolves to the contents of the upload's source changes.

https://launchpad.net/~svn/+archive/ppa/+packages

If the debian/changelog for the package is differential w.r.t. to the
previous PPA release, that turns out to be fairly useless for our users,
IMHO. This is because said previous PPA release is not readily
accessible via the Launchpad UI. (Users would have to "View all builds"
and then find their way to the respective changes files.)

https://launchpad.net/~svn/+archive/ppa/+files/subversion_1.6.9dfsg-1ubuntu0svn3_source.changes

https://launchpad.net/~svn/+archive/ppa/+files/subversion_1.6.9dfsg-1ubuntu0svn2_source.changes

Thus I maintain that the ppa3 changelog is "good", and the ppa2 one is
"no good", relatively speaking.

>>>> Perhaps you could leave the
>>>> merges to karmic, jaunty and hardy to me?
>>>
>>> Any particular reason? I think the PPA should maintain consistency
>>> across all distroseries it serves, whereever possible, and it's not
>>> really that much more work to do 4 distroseries rather than just one.
>>
>> I meant to add kwallet support to the 1.6.9 releases in karmic, jaunty
>> and hardy before upgrading the branches to 1.6.12. That would entail
>> submitting another round of builds for 1.6.9 on Launchpad.
> 
> Oh, did you specifically want a version of *1.6.9* with kwallet, that
> you could copy elsewhere before replacing it with 1.6.12 in the PPA,
> rather than jumping directly to 1.6.12+kwallet in one build?
> 
> Otherwise, we might as well go straight to 1.6.12.

Yes, I'd like to do a 1.6.9+kwallet build for karmic, jaunty and hardy.
I've prepared everything already, my local pbuilder binaries and sources
are OK, it's just a matter of submitting them to Launchpad.

(I have users updating from our PPA, and I'd like to provide them with a
KWallet-enabled 1.6.9 build without introducing any other changes. It's
sort of a maintenance release for the 1.6.9 series.)

>> Right now,
>> 1.6.9dfsg-1ubuntu0svn2 has support for KWallet in lucid only. That's not
>> very consistent, either.
> 
> Well, it's consistent with the intentions of matching the dependencies
> in use in the upstream Ubuntu version for the series that I previously
> had :-)
> 
>> I don't object to you reverting my changes or doing the merge for all
>> four series, though. I would, however, prefer to have KWallet support in
>> all our branches.
> 
> I'll hold off uploading anything until you've had a chance to answer my
> question above regarding whether you wanted an intermediate
> 1.6.9+kwallet build.

Thanks, I'll proceed with the 1.6.9+kwallet builds then, shall I?

Cheers,

-- 
Michael Diers, elego Software Solutions GmbH, http://www.elego.de