Le mer. 22 nov. 2023 à 14:01, João Valverde <j@xxxxxx> a écrit :
You are free to participate in the discussion or not. But I really
don't care to wait for the new committee that is pretty much exactly
the same as the old committee, as far as I can tell.
Anyway silence is another Wireshark project classic. At least you
tried to bring something to the debate, so thank you for that, at
least.
It seems like the discussion is shifting away from the initial goal. I don't think aggression/criticism/sarcasm brings anything to the debate, so I would prefer to keep a constructive exchange between whoever feels involved in the subject. I personally have never used the Debian scripts, but I did not consider updating the symbols list as being a really time consuming task (and I did it numerous times in the past), so I do not have an opinion on whether the current status quo is good or bad.
Balint's initial email was to collect some feedback regarding whether the scripts are being used or not. Anders provided the first feedback, let's see if others do (with the hope that they are monitoring this list...).
Best regards,
Pascal.
On 22/11/23 11:45, Roland Knall wrote:
Hi
I would recommend that we bring this topic before the
technical steering committee. As of right now, that
committee needs to be formed in January and this topic is
exactly why we are going to have the committee in the first
place. The process is in the final steps and should be
finished by the end of the year anyway.
I do not think that further discussing this issue is
actually beneficial for the long term resolution of this
situation. Both sides have valid arguments and good pointers
and I would suggest as soon as the committee has taken up
the topic we collectively create a single mission statement
as suggested by Joao above. Until then, personally I will
refrain from discussing this further, as I have said
everything there is to say from my perspective.
Do you agree Gerald?
kind regards
Roland
Am Mi., 22. Nov. 2023 um
12:36 Uhr schrieb João Valverde <j@xxxxxx>:
Maybe you´d like to volunteer to maintain the
Wireshark Debian assets? Since you've got the experience
and actually use it?
There are loads of lintian warnings waiting to be fixed,
or there were until recently. Maybe you'd like to start
there, and be more active staying on top of the
all-important symbol lists. Just a thought.
On 21/11/23 15:00, Anders Broman wrote:
Hi,
I found it useful to be able to do
Debian packages easily to provide internal
installation packages and even ppa for Ubuntu.
So I have been using the Debian build
system.
Best regards
Anders
Den tis 21 nov. 2023
15:48Roland Knall <rknall@xxxxxxxxx>
skrev:
As mentioned on the ticket - just
putting it here as well - I am against dropping
packaging/debian. But I am for having it
underneath packaging, and not in the main
directory, which is what the original change was
about. I respect Joao's opinion as well as yours
Balint. In this case here I think, we can provide
assistance for future implementors and as a
starting point, by keeping the directory
underneath packaging/debian.
I believe the current practice is reasonable and
beneficial enough for
many parties to warrant the work, but I could be
wrong.
Probably the most important question is if there
is anyone relying on
the packaging scripts there. If you are, please
speak up otherwise the
directory may be dropped.