cygwin-pkg-maint maintance

[Marco Atzeri]

On 11/08/2014 06:55, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
> On 2014-08-10 15:33, Marco Atzeri wrote:
>> I was looking at the needed maintenance of cygwin-pkg-maint,
>> crossing the data of x86 setup.ini with cygwin-pkg-maint
>> and I found 2 main classes of mismatch plus a minor one
>
> Thanks for taking the time to look into this!

It was a good excuse to refresh my python knowledge to cross the
two files data.


>> 1) missing packages.
>> Package that are in x86 setup.ini but not reported in cygwin-pkg-maint
>> at any level.
>> Nor the package, nor the source package and neither the first
>> subdirectory of x86/release is reported in the file;
>> I estimated the maintainer from the mailing list to be:
>>
>> PACKAGE                 SOURCE_PKG              MAINTAINER
>>
>> cloog-isl               cloog-isl               Achim Gratz
>> db4.5                   db4.5                   Dr. Volker Zell
>> db4.8                   db4.8                   Dr. Volker Zell
>> db4.8-doc               db4.8                   Dr. Volker Zell
>> font-misc-ethiopic      font-misc-ethiopic      Jon Turney
>> glib1.2                 glib1.2                 Yaakov Selkowitz
>> gtk1.2                  gtk1.2                  OBSOLETE (Yaakov
>> Selkowitz)
>> gtk1.2-engines          gtk1.2-engines          OBSOLETE (Yaakov
>> Selkowitz)
>
> The new upload mechanism doesn't seem to handle OBSOLETE well, so these
> two should be in my name without qualification in case I need to update
> them in the future.
>
>> html2ps                 html2ps                 Yaakov Selkowitz
>> isl                     isl                     Achim Gratz
>> libart_lgpl_2           libart_lgpl_2           Yaakov Selkowitz
>> libaudio-devel          nas                     Yaakov Selkowitz
>> libaudio2               nas                     Yaakov Selkowitz
>> libcloog-isl-devel      cloog-isl               Achim Gratz
>> libcloog-isl-doc        cloog-isl               Achim Gratz
>> libcloog-isl4           cloog-isl               Achim Gratz
>> libedit                 libedit                 Corinna Vinschen
>> libedit-devel           libedit                 Corinna Vinschen
>> libedit0                libedit                 Corinna Vinschen
>> libisl-devel            isl                     Achim Gratz
>> libisl-doc              isl                     Achim Gratz
>> libisl10                isl                     Achim Gratz
>> libzzip-devel           zziplib                 Yaakov Selkowitz
>> libzzip0.13             zziplib                 Yaakov Selkowitz
>> mesa-demos              mesa-demos              Yaakov Selkowitz
>> nas                     nas                     Yaakov Selkowitz
>> nc                      nc                      Corinna Vinschen
>> printproto              printproto              OBSOLETE (Yaakov
>> Selkowitz)
>> pwget                   pwget                   Jari Aalto
>> xhtml2ps                html2ps                 Yaakov Selkowitz
>> xlsx2csv                xlsx2csv                Jari Aalto
>> zziplib                 zziplib                 Yaakov Selkowitz
>
> The source packages should definitely be added; the subpackages depends
> on your last question.

OK.

>
>> 2) packages that are in cygwin-pkg-maint but not in setup.ini (nor x86
>> or x86_64 ones)
>>
>> most are OBSOLETE but not clearly defined as such, like
>> db2, db3.1, .. of Volker
>> libqhull, liblapack of mine
>
> Do you have a complete list?

yes, but looking at it I realized I need to merge 32bit and 64 bit 
analysis as some package exists only on 64bit due to the different splits.
I will report them later.


>
>> 3) typos
>>      libgck1-ddoc -> libgck1-doc
>>      libzziplib-devel -> libzzip-devel
>
> Yes, these are obvious fixes.
>
>> Question before I start to modify cygwin-pkg-maint:
>>
>> Does still make sense to report all binary packages in
>> the cygwin-pkg-maint files ?
>> Should we cluster them at source package or directory level as accepted
>> by the upload procedure ?
>> Specially for the dll libraries the name are continuously bumped, and
>> we will be always behind. At first glance we are missing ~ 200
>> packages; so roughly 8% of all the binary packages (~ 2700).
>> The active source packages are ~ 1400 and they change much
>> less frequently (ITP, ITA, orphanage and obsolescence)
>> so a better accuracy is possible.
>
> I've actually been thinking along the same lines.  AFAICS, the new
> upload mechanism doesn't care about subpackage listings so long as the
> source package is listed (provided, of course, that the standard
> directory layout is used).
>
> Therefore, the only "benefit" to having subpackages listed would be
> purely informative, but as you point out, 1) right now it's behind, 2)
> it's high maintenance for little gain, plus 3) a single person must
> anyway maintain an entire package with all its subpackages, and 4) nor
> does it actually indicate which subpackages map to which source packages.
>
> So I am all in favour of making this a source-only list, in line with
> other distro package maintainer "databases".
>
> Marco, if you're interested, please go ahead and add the missing
> *source* packages and fix those typos, but please hold off on removing
> anything until we hear from Corinna.

Ok, I will do.

> Thanks,
>
> Yaakov

Regards
Marco