Re: wal-e package

On 15 December 2014 at 11:53, Christoph Berg <cb@df7cb.de> wrote:
> Re: To Stuart Bishop 2014-08-28 <20140828102741.GD8293@msg.df7cb.de>
>> Re: Stuart Bishop 2014-08-28 <CADmi=6Neo=nbkgmpdiK==-W+C081eUzZVDXJ0SxwTOQ6JVs-mA@mail.gmail.com>
>> > Its in bzr on Launchpad, lp:~stub/ubuntu/trusty/wal-e/trunk or
>> > http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~stub/ubuntu/trusty/wal-e/trunk/files
>> >
>> > # bzr-builder format 0.3 deb-version {debupstream}-0~{revno}~daily
>> > lp:~stub/ubuntu/trusty/wal-e/trunk
>> >
>> > The azure dependency is also in bzr at
>> > lp:~stub/ubuntu/trusty/python-azure/trunk, recipe at
>> > https://code.launchpad.net/~stub/+recipe/python-azure-daily
>>
>> Ok, I'll have a look it.
>
> Hi,
>
> sorry for the late follow-up.
>
> I actually looked at the packages a while ago and even added them to
> apt.postgresql.org. I just didn't get around to reply here. IIRC
> basically everything was fine, just a few minor things which I already
> forgot again :-/ Looking again now...

Hi Christoph.

I think I've made all the necessary changes to the wal-e and
python-azure packages now. I have also wired up the wal-e tests.


> wal-e:
>
> debian/changelog would of course need "unstable" as dist
>
> debian/control:
> * the short Description shouldn't end in '.'
> * Standards-Version is 3.9.6 now
>
> There's a new upstream version available
>
> python-azure:
>
> The Description needs more text to explain what the package actually
> does, including what Azure really is. Also, the long Description
> should (mostly) be self-contained, i.e. not be a continuation of the
> short Description.
>
> debian/docs is empty, remove it
>
> debian/compat is 9, but Build-Depends: debhelper is only >= 8
>
> debian/copyright: "License: Apache License" should only be "License:
> Apache" (or else Lintian complains)
>
> There's also a new upstream version available
>
> I'll upload to Debian once these are fixed, thanks for the packages!
>
>> > > Would you be interested to maintain the package in Debian? I can
>> > > sponsor uploads.
>> >
>> > I am interested. However, I don't have any Debian systems to test
>> > with, so I don't know if it is practical or not. My main concern is
>> > the dependencies.
>>
>> Ideally the package would have testsuite in autopkgtest format. No
>> idea if it's testable without real S3 access or the like, but a basic
>> smoke test should be sufficient.
>
> (There is a "tests" directory in wal-e, but "python runtests.py" says
> something about 0 items, and "make test" fails with some horrible mess
> with $PATH and env.)
>
> Christoph
> --
> cb@df7cb.de | http://www.df7cb.de/



--
Stuart Bishop <stuart@stuartbishop.net>
http://www.stuartbishop.net/