FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 11-19-2011, 02:39 PM
Neil Williams
 
Default Bug#649274: Forming a new upstream for timidity (and reporting various issues with current deb pkg)

On Sat, 19 Nov 2011 15:05:00 +0100
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote:

> This is a bit unusual bug-report I'm afraid normally I would've
> send this as an email to the Debian package maintainer of
> timidity, but it seems that timidity is currently orphaned in
> Debian :|

There has been no interest from anyone wanting to take over Debian
maintenance of timidity since the previous maintainer orphaned it. It
now has a release critical bug because the current source fails to
build. The bug has been open for 3 months and is sufficient reason to
remove timidity from Debian today. As you've expressed some interest,
I'm willing to not file the removal bug right now but that doesn't
exclude someone else doing precisely that.

Given the status of the package in Debian, it is more likely that
timidity will be removed rather than updated. Maybe once there is a
functioning upstream and a new upstream release, someone may
reintroduce the package into Debian.

CC'ing the only person to express some interest. Geoffrey, if you are
no longer interested in timidity, despite signs of interest from a
possible new upstream, please retitle #585039 as O: instead of ITA:

Hans: have you any clues about the pulseaudio issues?

Joost Yervante Damad comments in the bug report orphaning timidity:
> If you want to take over maintenance, be prepared to deal with obscure
> pulseaudio issues.
#585039

I think it would also be a very good idea, Hans, if you put a short
message on bug #585039 about your interest in a new, fixed, upstream
release as this will be one of the places people will look before
seeking removal of timidity. That said, interest from upstream is not
of itself going to stop removal from Debian.

> The reason I'm sending this mail is because one of the Fedora
> packages I (co)maintain is timidity. Recently we got a number
> of bugreports related to timidity, and one of the conclusions
> was that timidity needs some love.

I sympathise, I've felt the same about other packages and gone into the
cycle of getting the SourceForge project re-assigned, porting the code
to current libraries and systems, only to find that the codebase really
cannot sustain a second transition or some dependency simply becomes
abandonware. The workload can gradually become unsustainable and
sometimes it's simpler to just accept that the package has had too much
bit rot already and it would be easier to drop it.

> I also went through all the changes in the Debian package, and
> were relevant have added those too. Note that I deliberately
> did not include a few of the changes from Debian, as I believe
> they are wrong! See below for details.

As the potential new upstream, you are welcome to make that decision.
It's better for Debian if there is just a new upstream release and
then someone with sufficient interest (not me!) can look at what might
need to be done to bring the Debian package up to date.

Sadly, it is more likely that timidity will have to be removed and
then, possibly, reintroduced if (and only if) someone reading this
message gets sufficiently motivated to work on timidity in Debian.

> So now I've a nice and polished version of timidity, and given
> that the latest official release has been 6 years ago I think
> it would be good to do a new official release, hence I've
> contacted the current admin and developers of the sf.net
> timidity project, hopefully they will allow me to take over
> the sf.net project, I would have loved to work together
> with the Debian maintainer on forming a new upstream, but alas.

When there is a new release available via SF or some other site,
please update bugs #649274 and #585039. (Don't feel obliged to keep with
SF but generally I've found them supportive when someone offers to
adopt an abandoned project).

> I believe this patch is meant to fix a compiler warning, unfortunately
> the patch does more then that, it actually changes the meaning of the code.

... as long as the package now builds on current Debian unstable
(make distcheck using gcc-4.6 with binutils-gold on any current
GNU/Linux distro will be a good test)...

Sorry I cannot comment on the patches themselves, I don't care about
timidity - my only concern is that broken & abandoned packages in Debian
either find new maintainers or get removed.

> Before looking at the Debian changes I spend an entire day tracking down
> what I believe is the real cause for Debian bug 536252, after a similar
> issue was reported in Fedora bug 710927:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710927

Be assured that your effort is respected but unless someone steps up to
maintain your work in Debian, timidity *will* be removed.

Now that timidity is on my radar, I'll keep an eye on it. If nobody
responds to #649274 or #585039 or fixes the fail to build bug #639196
then I will ask for removal of timidity from Debian unstable and
testing in ~ 10 days.

> As said I hope to do a new upstream release soon, amongst a lot of bugfixes
> this will also include IPV6 support for the relevant bits of timidity.

If timidity doesn't get IPv6 support soon, it will end up being removed
from Debian due to other release requirements anyway. That is another
good reason to remove the current version of timidity unless someone
steps up to introduce the new upstream release.

So, overall, there are three very good reasons to remove the current
timidity version from Debian - each of which is sufficient reason for
removal on their own. Someone needs to adopt it and get your new
release uploaded real soon now.

--


Neil Williams
=============
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
 
Old 11-19-2011, 02:55 PM
Hans de Goede
 
Default Bug#649274: Forming a new upstream for timidity (and reporting various issues with current deb pkg)

Hi,

On 11/19/2011 04:39 PM, Neil Williams wrote:

On Sat, 19 Nov 2011 15:05:00 +0100
Hans de Goede<hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote:


This is a bit unusual bug-report I'm afraid normally I would've
send this as an email to the Debian package maintainer of
timidity, but it seems that timidity is currently orphaned in
Debian :|


There has been no interest from anyone wanting to take over Debian
maintenance of timidity since the previous maintainer orphaned it. It
now has a release critical bug because the current source fails to
build. The bug has been open for 3 months and is sufficient reason to
remove timidity from Debian today. As you've expressed some interest,
I'm willing to not file the removal bug right now but that doesn't
exclude someone else doing precisely that.



In case this much was not clear already note that my interest does not
extend to actually maintaining the Debian package myself.


Given the status of the package in Debian, it is more likely that
timidity will be removed rather than updated.


Understood, I'm just trying to inform anyone who may pick up timidity
for Debian about my work, so that they don't start from scratch.


Maybe once there is a
functioning upstream and a new upstream release, someone may
reintroduce the package into Debian.

CC'ing the only person to express some interest. Geoffrey, if you are
no longer interested in timidity, despite signs of interest from a
possible new upstream, please retitle #585039 as O: instead of ITA:

Hans: have you any clues about the pulseaudio issues?

Joost Yervante Damad comments in the bug report orphaning timidity:

If you want to take over maintenance, be prepared to deal with obscure
pulseaudio issues.

#585039



I know of no pulseaudio issues, but note that in Fedora, the default
timidity config will first try to use pulseaudio through libao's pulse
support, before trying alsa (which will end up using pulse through an
alsa plugin) I know that I'm the one who made that change, it could
very well be that I did that because when timidity uses alsa directly
it does so in a way which is not compatible with pulse. Note that we've
had no issues with timidity which are pulse related for a long time know,
so I would not worry about this.


I think it would also be a very good idea, Hans, if you put a short
message on bug #585039 about your interest in a new, fixed, upstream
release as this will be one of the places people will look before
seeking removal of timidity. That said, interest from upstream is not
of itself going to stop removal from Debian.


The reason I'm sending this mail is because one of the Fedora
packages I (co)maintain is timidity. Recently we got a number
of bugreports related to timidity, and one of the conclusions
was that timidity needs some love.


I sympathise, I've felt the same about other packages and gone into the
cycle of getting the SourceForge project re-assigned, porting the code
to current libraries and systems, only to find that the codebase really
cannot sustain a second transition or some dependency simply becomes
abandonware. The workload can gradually become unsustainable and
sometimes it's simpler to just accept that the package has had too much
bit rot already and it would be easier to drop it.


I hear you loud and clear (similar experiences on my side), but
in the case of timidity I think keeping it alive is important, because
it is one of the few software wavetable midi synths we have (and as
such has unfortunately been forked into SDL_mixer, libtimidity and too
many others).



I also went through all the changes in the Debian package, and
were relevant have added those too. Note that I deliberately
did not include a few of the changes from Debian, as I believe
they are wrong! See below for details.


As the potential new upstream, you are welcome to make that decision.
It's better for Debian if there is just a new upstream release and
then someone with sufficient interest (not me!) can look at what might
need to be done to bring the Debian package up to date.


Ok, note though that I'm not all too familiar with timidity
internals myself, hence my attempts to explain my decisions, so that
others can inspect them if they want to.


Sadly, it is more likely that timidity will have to be removed and
then, possibly, reintroduced if (and only if) someone reading this
message gets sufficiently motivated to work on timidity in Debian.



Understood.


So now I've a nice and polished version of timidity, and given
that the latest official release has been 6 years ago I think
it would be good to do a new official release, hence I've
contacted the current admin and developers of the sf.net
timidity project, hopefully they will allow me to take over
the sf.net project, I would have loved to work together
with the Debian maintainer on forming a new upstream, but alas.


When there is a new release available via SF or some other site,
please update bugs #649274 and #585039. (Don't feel obliged to keep with
SF but generally I've found them supportive when someone offers to
adopt an abandoned project).


They no longer have an official policy for taking over projects, so
I hope that the current admin still reads his email. Once I've a new
release out the door I'll try to remember to update these bugs.


I believe this patch is meant to fix a compiler warning, unfortunately
the patch does more then that, it actually changes the meaning of the code.


... as long as the package now builds on current Debian unstable
(make distcheck using gcc-4.6 with binutils-gold on any current
GNU/Linux distro will be a good test)...

Sorry I cannot comment on the patches themselves, I don't care about
timidity - my only concern is that broken& abandoned packages in Debian
either find new maintainers or get removed.


<snip>


Be assured that your effort is respected but unless someone steps up to
maintain your work in Debian, timidity *will* be removed.

Now that timidity is on my radar, I'll keep an eye on it. If nobody
responds to #649274 or #585039 or fixes the fail to build bug #639196
then I will ask for removal of timidity from Debian unstable and
testing in ~ 10 days.



<snip>



If timidity doesn't get IPv6 support soon, it will end up being removed
from Debian due to other release requirements anyway. That is another
good reason to remove the current version of timidity unless someone
steps up to introduce the new upstream release.

So, overall, there are three very good reasons to remove the current
timidity version from Debian - each of which is sufficient reason for
removal on their own. Someone needs to adopt it and get your new
release uploaded real soon now.


Understood.

Regards,

Hans


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4EC7D179.4060509@redhat.com">http://lists.debian.org/4EC7D179.4060509@redhat.com
 
Old 11-19-2011, 03:05 PM
"John D. Hendrickson and Sara Darnell"
 
Default Bug#649274: Forming a new upstream for timidity (and reporting various issues with current deb pkg)

"If timidity doesn't get IPv6 support soon" ?

I don't see IPv6 as important. It's a major maintenance burden (a hack to firewall, configure,
...), IPSs use it to dominate ISP sales, and so far no one claims to have a final spec on it.


when is IPv4 over IPv6 a sin? are bsd sockets a sin (they are old)? and html (pdf/flash is better)?

personally i don't like hearing "i added code but broke 1,000 other packages".

just commenting on "improvements that don't state they bump major version but do worse anyhow".

not that you all did it us all i'd guess.

Thanks, John Hendrickson

p.s. (sorry i can usually fix code but cannot say I'm situated to maintain at this time)


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4EC7D3B8.5020505@cox.net">http://lists.debian.org/4EC7D3B8.5020505@cox.net
 
Old 11-19-2011, 03:11 PM
Philipp Kern
 
Default Bug#649274: Forming a new upstream for timidity (and reporting various issues with current deb pkg)

On 2011-11-19, Neil Williams <codehelp@debian.org> wrote:
> If timidity doesn't get IPv6 support soon, it will end up being removed
> from Debian due to other release requirements anyway. That is another
> good reason to remove the current version of timidity unless someone
> steps up to introduce the new upstream release.

Lack of IPv6 support is only critical if it causes data loss (like with libspf,
which caused rejects because of addresses that were simply not understood).
By itself it's not a reason for removal, especially as we're not talking about
a package that's primarily a network service, but instead a software sound
renderer.

Kind regards
Philipp Kern


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: slrnjcfl9e.ucn.trash@kelgar.0x539.de">http://lists.debian.org/slrnjcfl9e.ucn.trash@kelgar.0x539.de
 
Old 11-19-2011, 03:24 PM
"John D. Hendrickson and Sara Darnell"
 
Default Bug#649274: Forming a new upstream for timidity (and reporting various issues with current deb pkg)

my mistake. (an "install old libs" thing? an incompat lib mod should be a new major ver)

Philipp Kern wrote:

~ Lack of IPv6 support is only critical if it causes data loss (like with libspf,
By itself it's not a reason for removal, especially as we're not talking about ~
Kind regards
Philipp Kern


thank you Philipp !
John H


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4EC7D83F.50709@cox.net">http://lists.debian.org/4EC7D83F.50709@cox.net
 
Old 11-19-2011, 07:59 PM
Geoffrey Thomas
 
Default Bug#649274: Forming a new upstream for timidity (and reporting various issues with current deb pkg)

On Sat, 19 Nov 2011, Neil Williams wrote:


CC'ing the only person to express some interest. Geoffrey, if you are
no longer interested in timidity, despite signs of interest from a
possible new upstream, please retitle #585039 as O: instead of ITA:


Thanks for Ccing me. The "real world" had caught up with me a bit this
semester, both in terms of taking away time for non-academic technical
work and for writing music, but I'm graduating soon and done with
interviews, so I have more time now (and have a laptop running testing)
and do intend to maintain it.


I'd given my sponsor a debdiff to adopt the package and fix the FTBFS. I
think we'd just both forgotten about it -- I've just poked him about
uploading it.


Hans, thanks for the patches and review, and I'll try to take a look at
them over the next few days. I'd definitely be interested in contributing
to a revived upstream -- yes, timidity does need some love.


--
Geoffrey Thomas
http://ldpreload.com
geofft@ldpreload.com


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: alpine.DEB.2.02.1111191550000.7288@tyger.mit.edu"> http://lists.debian.org/alpine.DEB.2.02.1111191550000.7288@tyger.mit.edu
 
Old 11-20-2011, 09:52 AM
Hans de Goede
 
Default Bug#649274: Forming a new upstream for timidity (and reporting various issues with current deb pkg)

Hi,

On 11/19/2011 09:59 PM, Geoffrey Thomas wrote:

On Sat, 19 Nov 2011, Neil Williams wrote:


CC'ing the only person to express some interest. Geoffrey, if you are
no longer interested in timidity, despite signs of interest from a
possible new upstream, please retitle #585039 as O: instead of ITA:


Thanks for Ccing me. The "real world" had caught up with me a bit this semester, both in terms of taking away time for non-academic technical work and for writing music, but I'm graduating soon and done with interviews, so I have more time now (and have a laptop running testing) and do intend to maintain it.

I'd given my sponsor a debdiff to adopt the package and fix the FTBFS. I think we'd just both forgotten about it -- I've just poked him about uploading it.

Hans, thanks for the patches and review, and I'll try to take a look at them over the next few days. I'd definitely be interested in contributing to a revived upstream -- yes, timidity does need some love.


That is great to hear!

Let me know if you've any questions. Note that my patches are
based on the current CVS code, not on the latest tarbal!

I'm afraid that I'm not getting anywhere so far with my attempts to
take over the current sf.net project, my mail to all the developers
and the single admin it has now has bounced for at least the
admin.

I'll try to contact the sf.net staff, but AFAIK they no longer allow
taking over projects without help from one of the former admins.

Regards,

Hans


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4EC8DC03.2000900@redhat.com">http://lists.debian.org/4EC8DC03.2000900@redhat.com
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:18 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org