Search Results: "Julian Gilbey"

11 January 2016

Norbert Preining: 10 years TeX Live in Debian

I recently dug through my history of involvement with TeX (Live), and found out that in January there are a lot of anniversaries I should celebrate: 14 years ago I started building binaries for TeX Live, 11 years ago I proposed the packaging TeX Live for Debian, 10 years ago the TeX Live packages entered Debian. There are other things to celebrate next year (2017), namely the 10 year anniversary of the (not so new anymore) infrastructure in short tlmgr of TeX Live packaging, but this will come later. In this blog post I want to concentrate on my involvement in TeX Live and Debian. TeX Live/Debian Those of you not interested in boring and melancholic look-back onto history can safely skip reading this one. For those a bit interested in the history of TeX in Debian, please read on. Debian releases and TeX systems The TeX system of choice has been for long years teTeX, curated by Thomas Esser. Digging through the Debian Archive and combining it with changelog entries as well as personal experiences since I joined Debian, here is a time line of TeX in Debian, all to my best knowledge.
Date Version Name teTeX/TeX Live Maintainers
1993-96 <1 ? ? Christoph Martin
6/1996 1.1 Buzz ?
12/1996 1.2 Rec ?
6/1997 1.3 Bo teTeX 0.4
7/1998 2.0 Ham teTeX 0.9
3/1999 2.1 Slink teTeX 0.9.9N
8/2000 2.2 Potato teTeX 1.0
7/2002 3.0 Woody teTeX 1.0
6/2005 3.1 Sarge teTeX 2.0 Atsuhito Kohda
4/2007 4.0 Etch teTeX 3.0, TeX Live 2005 Frank K ster, NP
2/2009 5.0 Lenny TeX Live 2007 NP
2/2011 6.0 Squeeze TeX Live 2009
5/2013 7.0 Whezzy TeX Live 2012
4/2015 8.0 Jessie TeX Live 2014
??? ??? Stretch TeX Live 2015
The history of TeX in Debian is thus split more or less in 10 years teTeX, and 10 years TeX Live. While I cannot check back to the origins, my guesses are that already in the very first releases (te)TeX was included. The first release I can confirm (via the Debian archive) shipping teTeX is the release Bo (June 1997). Maintainership during the first 10 years showed some fluctuation: The first years/releases (till about 2002) were dominated by Christoph Martin with Adrian Bunk and few others, who did most packaging work on teTeX version 1. After this Atsuhito Kohda with help from Hilmar Preusse and some people brought teTeX up to version 2, and from 2004 to 2007 Frank K ster, again with help of Hilmar Preusse and some other, took over most of the work on teTeX. Other names appearing throughout the changelog are (incomplete list) Julian Gilbey, Ralf Stubner, LaMont Jones, and C.M Connelly (and many more bug-reporters and fixers). Looking at the above table I have to mention the incredible amount of work that both Atsuhito Kohda and Frank K ster have put into the teTeX packages, and many of their contributions have been carried over into the TeX Live packages. While there haven t been many releases during their maintainership, their work has inspired and supported the packaging of TeX Live to a huge extend. Start of TeX Live I got involved in TeX Live back in 2002 when I started building binaries for the alpha-linux architecture. I can t remember when I first had the idea to package TeX Live for Debian, but here is a time line from my first email to the Debian Developers mailing list concerning TeX Live, to the first accepted upload:
Date Subject/Link Comment
2005-01-11 binaries for different architectures in debian packages The first question concerning packaging TeX Live, about including pre-built binaries
2005-01-25 Debian-TeXlive Proposal II A better proposal, but still including pre-built binaries
2005-05-17 Proposal for a tex-base package Proposal for tex-base, later tex-common, as basis for both teTeX and TeX live packages
2015-06-10 Bug#312897: ITP: texlive ITP bug for TeX Live
2005-09-17 Re: Take over of texinfo/info packages Taking over texinfo which was somehow orphaned started here
2005-11-28 Re: texlive-basic_2005-1_i386.changes REJECTED My answer to the rejection by ftp-master of the first upload. This email sparked a long discussion about packaging and helped improve the naming of packages (but not really the packaging itself).
2006-01-12 Upload of TeX Live 2005-1 to Debian The first successful upload
2006-01-22 Accepted texlive-base 2005-1 (source all) TeX Live packages accepted into Debian/experimental
One can see from the first emails that at that time I didn t have any idea about Debian packaging and proposed to ship the binaries built within the TeX Live system on Debian. What followed was first a long discussion about whether there is any need for just another TeX system. The then maintainer Frank K ster took a clear stance in favor of including TeX Live, and after several rounds of proposals, tests, rejections and improvements, the first successful upload of TeX Live packages to Debian/experimental happened on 12 January 2006, so exactly 10 years ago. Packaging Right from the beginning I used a meta-packaging approach. That is, instead of working directly with the source packages, I wrote (Perl) scripts that generated the source packages from a set of directives. There were several reasons why I choose to introduce this extra layer: Till now I am not 100% sure whether it was the best idea, but the scripts remain in place till now, only adapted to the new packaging paradigm in TeX Live (without xml) and adding new functionality. This allows me to just kick off one script that does do all the work, including building .orig.tar.gz, source packages, binary packages. For those interested to follow the frantic activity during the first years, there is a file CHANGES.packaging which for the years from 2005 to 2011 documents very extensively the changes I made in these years. I don t want to count the hours the went into all this  Development over the years TeX Live 2005 was just another TeX system but not the preferred one in Debian Etch and beyond. But then in May 2006, Thomas Esser announced the end of development of teTeX, which cleared the path for TeX Live as main TeX system in Debian (and the world!). The next release of Debian, Lenny (1/2009), already carried only TeX Live. Unfortunately it was only TeX Live 2007 and not 2008, mostly due to me having been involved in rewriting the upstream infrastructure based on Debian package files instead of the notorious xml files. This took quite a lot of attention and time from Debian away to upstream development, but this will be discussed in a different post. Similarly, the release of TeX Live included in Debian Squeeze (released 2/2011) was only TeX Live 2009 (instead of 2010), but since then (Wheezy and Jessie) the releases of TeX Live in Debian were always the latest released ones. Current status Since about 2013 I am trying to keep a regular schedule of new TeX Live packages every month. These helps me to keep up with the changes in upstream packaging and reduces the load of packaging a new release of TeX Live. It also bring to users of unstable and testing a very up-to-date TeX system, where packages at most lack 1 month of behind the TeX Live net updates. Future As most of the readers here know, besides caring for TeX (Live) and related packages in Debian, I am also responsible for the TeX Live Manager (tlmgr) and most of upstream s infrastructure including network distribution. Thus, my (spare, outside work) time needs to be distributed between all these projects (and some others) which leaves less and less time for Debian packaging. Fortunately the packaging is in a state that making regular updates once a month is less of a burden, since most steps are automatized. What is still a bit of a struggle is adapting the binary package (src:texlive-bin) to new releases. But also this has become simpler due to less invasive changes over the years. All in all, I don t have many plans for TeX Live in Debian besides keeping the current system running as it is. Search for and advise to future maintainers and collaborators I would be more than happy if new collaborators appear, with fresh ideas and some spare time. Unfortunately, my experience over these 10 years with people showing up and proposing changes (anyone remembers the guy proposing a complete rewrite in ML or so?) is that nobody really wants to invest time and energy, but search for quick solutions. This is not something that will work with a package like TeX Live, sized of several gigabyte (the biggest in the Debian archive), and complicated inner workings. I advise everyone being interested in helping to package TeX Live for Debian, to first install normal TeX Live from TUG, get used to what actions happen during updates (format rebuilds, hyphenation patters, map file updates). One does not need to have a perfect understanding of what exactly happens down there in the guts (I didn t have in the beginning, either), but if you want to help packaging and never heard about what format dumps or map files are, then this might be a slight obstacle. Conclusion TeX Live is the only TeX system in wide use across lots of architectures and operating systems, and the only comparable system, MikTeX, is Windows specific (also there are traces of ports to Unix). Backed by all the big user groups of TeX, TeX Live will remain the prime choice for the foreseeable future, and thus also TeX Live in Debian.

21 July 2011

Rapha&#235;l Hertzog: People behind Debian: Martin Michlmayr, former Debian Project Leader

Martin Michlmayr is a Debian developer since 2000 and I share quite a few things with him, starting with his age and involvement in the quality assurance team. He managed to be elected Debian Project Leader in 2003 and 2004. He s no longer as active as he used to be but his input is always very valuable and he continues to do very interesting things in particular concerning the support of NAS devices. Read on for the details. Raphael: Who are you? Martin: I m Martin Michlmayr. I m 32, originally from Austria, and currently living in the UK. I ve contributed to various free software projects over the years but Debian is without doubt the one I m most passionate about. I joined Debian in 2000 when I was a student. I worked on Debian more or less full time for a few years while I was pretending to study. Later I started a PhD to do research about quality and management aspects of volunteer free software projects. I investigated the release process in several free software projects, in particular looking at time-based releases. After finishing my PhD in 2007, I joined Hewlett-Packard. I m part of HP s Open Source Program Office and work on various free software and open source activities, both internally and within the community. Raphael: How did you start contributing to Debian? Martin: I first used Debian in the days of 0.93R6, some time around the end of 1995. The 0.93R6 release was still based on a.out but I needed an ELF-based system for some application, so I moved to Slackware. I then quickly moved to Red Hat Linux where I stayed for several years. I rediscovered Debian in 2000 and quickly decided to join the project. I cannot recall how I rediscovered Debian but when I did, it was clear to me that Debian was the ideal project for me: I could identify with its philosophy, I liked the volunteer nature of the project, and I found the size and diversity of Debian interesting since a large project offers a lot of different challenges and opportunities. I remember how many new things there were to learn and back then the documentation and other resources for new contributors were nowhere as good as they are today. My application manager, Julian Gilbey, was a great help he was incredibly friendly and passionate about Debian. I also remember meeting up with Peter Palfrader (weasel) for key signing when we were both in the New Maintainer queue. I was incredibly lucky with my New Maintainer process and soon became an official Debian Developer. Because there was a shortage of application managers, my first major contribution in Debian was to become an application manager myself and help other people join the project. Debian is a large project with a long history and a rich culture, so new contributors should expect that it will take some time to become familiar with everything. Fortunately, there are many resources, such as documentation and the debian-mentors list, for new contributors. Another great way to become familiar with the way things are done in Debian is to subscribe to various Debian mailing lists and ideally to read some mailing list archives. It s also a great idea to attend the Debian Conference or other conferences since meeting people in real life is a great way to integrate. I remember attending Debian Conference 1 in Bordeaux where I gave my first public talk. Finally, new contributors should find an area where they can make a unique contribution. Most people in Debian maintain packages but there are so many other ways to contribute. For example, most of my contributions were not technical but were about coordination and other organizational activities. Raphael: What s your biggest achievement within Debian? Martin: I m particularly proud of a number of achievements: Raphael: Speaking about NAS devices: what exactly are you doing on this topic and how can people help? Martin: There are plenty of instructions on the Internet to install Linux distributions on NAS or various embedded devices by connecting a serial console and then typing in hundreds of commands. What I found is that such instructions significantly limit the user base because they are way too complicated for most users. There are just too many steps that can go wrong. So instead, in Debian, we provide a solution that just works: usually, you download a firmware image for your NAS device from Debian and when you upgrade you get the Debian installer. You connect to the installer via SSH and perform a normal installation. The installer knows about the device and will prepare everything for you automatically for example, it knows if the device has requirements for the partition layout and it will install the kernel where the device expects to find it; unfortunately, NAS devices are not like PCs, so the requirements are different for almost every device and therefore you need special code to support a new device. Finally, there are detailed installation guides and we provide help on our mailing lists. There are a number of technical areas for improvement. The installation could be made even easier, and it would be nice to support new platforms and devices. A bigger problem is that while we ve implemented a great solution for NAS devices, we haven t really extended this work to support other classes of devices. For example, tablets and mobile phones are getting incredibly popular and we don t have a compelling solution for such devices, mostly because of the lack of an appropriate GUI. Raphael: What are your plans for Debian Wheezy? Martin: I ve recently been asked by Stefano Zacchiroli, our current Debian Project Leader, to coordinate the care-taking of Debian finances. Debian, as a volunteer project, relies on donations and in-kind gifts (e.g. hardware) to maintain its infrastructure and to support various development efforts, such as funding sprints and other developer gatherings. Debian s money and other assets are held by affiliate organizations around the world. My responsibility will be to keep track of money and other assets (e.g. hardware and trademarks), work with the DPL to establish procedures related to the use of Debian s assets, and make sure that the procedures are followed. Finally, we want to publish public statements so our donors know how we use their donations to further improve Debian. I just started working on this and this will be my main activity in Debian in the coming months. Raphael: Speaking of money, I plan to run a fundraising to get the Debian book I wrote with Roland Mas translated (cf. http://debian-handbook.info). Is this something Debian should support? Martin: First of all, I should make it clear that I don t decide how Debian spends its money. This is up to the DPL to decide together with the project at a whole. I ll just make sure that procedures are followed and expenses tracked and reported properly. Having said that, in my opinion, it s unlikely that Debian as a project will fund this effort. It would be inconsistent with the position of the project not to fund work directly (only some related expenses, such as travel costs to allow Debian teams to organize face-to-face meetings). Whether Debian should support the fundraising effort by helping to promote it is another question and that s probably not as clear cut. It looks like a worthwhile effort, but on the other hand it would be unfair for authors of other Debian books for Debian to put its weight behind one and there are many other efforts that are worth promoting if you promote one, where do you stop? So while it sounds worthwhile, it s probably better for Debian to stay out of it. But somehow related to this, I sometimes worry about the fact that there are so few paid opportunities around Debian. If you contribute to the Linux kernel for a while, you have an excellent chance to get hired by someone and to work on the kernel full time. The kernel may be an extreme example but there are a lot of projects that have more paid opportunities than Debian, e.g. Mono, GNOME, OpenOffice/LibreOffice and KDE. Obviously, there are some Debian Developers who can spend some time on Debian as part of their job. I know that some Canonical employees contribute to Debian, that support companies like credativ improve Debian as part of their work, and that system administrators fix bugs or package new software as they deploy Debian. But I think this is a minority of contributors and even they don t work full time on Debian. Instead what I see is that a lot of people leave university, get a job and then no longer have time for Debian or people start a family and no longer have time. I can take myself as an example since I don t have nearly as much time as I did in the past when I was a student. I guess there are different ways to deal with this problem one would be to create more paid opportunities around Debian outside the project, another one might be to make it easier for new volunteers to join the project. I don t have the answers to these questions but it s something I wonder about, and I also wonder whether pure volunteer projects can still keep up with projects with a lot of full time contributors. Raphael: What motivates you to continue to contribute year after year? Martin: Debian is a great project with a great mission, goals and people. I contribute to make Debian a better solution and to promote the free software philosophy. Finally, the community around Debian provides a lot of motivation. It s amazing how much I ve learned about other cultures because of my involvement in Debian and how many friends I ve made over the years all around the world. Raphael: Do you have wishes for Debian Wheezy? Martin: Not really. I m pretty happy with the way things are going at the moment. We have made a lot of organizational changes in the last few years from which the project has greatly benefited. I m particularly pleased about the plans to adopt a time-based freeze. Raphael: Is there someone in Debian that you admire for their contributions? Martin: There are many people I admire greatly. I d like to mention Joey Hess because he s a great example to follow. He doesn t get involved in politics, is easy to work with and does great technical work. In fact, he has made not one but several contributions that have completely changed Debian (debconf, debhelper, and debian-installer). Furthermore, Debian has a lot of contributors who have done great work over the years but who are not very vocal about it. People like Colin Watson or Peter Palfrader. Debian has many unique contributors and the list of people I admire is much longer than the few people I just mentioned.
Thank you to Martin for the time spent answering my questions. I hope you enjoyed reading his answers as I did. He raised some interesting questions. Subscribe to my newsletter to get my monthly summary of the Debian/Ubuntu news and to not miss further interviews. You can also follow along on Identi.ca, Twitter and Facebook.

No comment Liked this article? Click here. My blog is Flattr-enabled.

7 April 2011

Rapha&#235;l Hertzog: People behind Debian: Adam D. Barratt, release manager

Adam D. Barratt is a Debian developer since 2008, in just a few years he got heavily involved to the point of being now Release manager , a high responsibility role within the community. He worked hard with the other members of the release team to make Squeeze happen. You could expect the release managers to have some rest after a big release, but it s not really the case. With the long freeze, loads of transitions have accumulated and they are now busy to get all those updated packages in the new testing (wheezy). Despite this Adam took some time to answer my questions. He shares with us his impression on the Squeeze release, his opinion on time-based freezes (regular/predictable freeze) and much more. Read on. My questions are in bold, the rest is by Adam. Who are you? I m a 31 year old software developer and part-time sysadmin for a software and IT services company based in the south of England. I have no children, no pets and a long-suffering partner who puts up with me spending far too much time tinkering with things and people making fun of her Macbook during Debconf. As well as being on the release team, I m a member of the maintainer teams for devscripts and lintian. Can you describe your journey in Debian and in the release team? I was introduced to Debian as part of an infrastructure upgrade at work, moving from a set of Red Hat and Solaris-based systems. As part of that, we submitted some bugs for issues we found during the upgrade and for small patches we included in some software to add extra functionality we wanted. From that starting point I became more interested in Debian in general and began following some of the mailing lists and IRC channels. When Julian Gilbey asked for help with the maintenance of devscripts, I submitted some patches for some of the outstanding bug reports and was invited to join the team which was being created to handle maintenance for the package. One of the then Release Managers was also on the team and asked if I d be interested in working on a couple of updates they wanted to the scripts which generate the proposed-updates overview pages. I added the new functionality which was merged in to the live scripts and a little while later I was invited to join the team, shortly before Debconf 9. As most readers will be aware, we unfortunately reached a point during last year where we didn t have anyone filling the Release Manager role. During that period, I became more active in handling transitions and requests for updates to stable and as time went on more people started to suggest that I should put myself forward for the position, or refer to me as already being RM. I procrastinated over the decision for some time but after discussions during Debconf 10 I came round to the idea that we should have the RM role filled again and agreed to take it on, together with Neil. The rest, as they say How much time do you usually spend working for the release team ? I ve been trying to work out how to usefully answer this question. My initial answer was approximately two hours each day , but the longer I thought about it the more I started debating exactly what I should include under the umbrella of release work; after some to-and-fro I ve decided to stick with my initial answer. During periods when Debian is frozen and particularly in the lead up to the release that time commitment increases significantly, particularly over weekends. I m reliably informed that at that point the correct answer to the question is too much time . :-) What s your own retrospective of the Squeeze release? What went well and what needs to be improved? Overall, I believe the release went well and that we should all be proud of the Squeeze release. The parts of the release cycle which highlighted the need for improvement all share, imo, a single root cause communication, particularly around freeze-related plans. We worked hard during the freeze itself to improve our communication with the rest of the project and want to continue in that vein during the Wheezy cycle. One thing that I personally found quite difficult at times before the freeze was keeping track of the transitions which were still waiting for a place in the queue; it s also something that we could improve on at this early stage of the Wheezy cycle. In order to help us keep a clear overview of requests for transitions, stable updates and binNMUs, it would be helpful if they could be filed as appropriately user-tagged bugs. This not only allows us to easily get an overview of the status of requests from the BTS but also aids transparency by allowing anyone else to do so; as a useful additional feature, it means that we can use the BTS s blocking functionality to indicate reasons why a request cannot be fulfilled right now. Are you in favor of time based freeze? I think there s merit in having a time frame that we can work towards in order to achieve the goals which we set ourselves for the release, as individual maintainers, maintenance teams and a project. I do have concerns that even with such a time frame in place there will still be uploads made very close to the proposed freeze point and transitions which may be unfinished, for example because of an unforeseen entanglement with or reliance on the transition of another package. One thing I m interested in is how exact and specific that time frame should be and the balance between predictability and being able to achieve everything we want for a great release; this is something we can cover in the debate on this subject which I know many people have strong opinions about. What are your plans for Debian Wheezy? The Wheezy to-do list I started before the final Squeeze release begins multiarch, multiarch, multiarch . It looks like we re finally going to get that achieved during this release cycle, thanks to a great deal of hard work from various people. I m also interested in seeing the C.UTF-8 locale standardised throughout Debian and continuing to work on our tools and processes to make tracking of transitions and stable updates simpler (or at least appearing to be so :-) and more transparent. With my package maintenance hats on, I d like to help ensure that both devscripts and lintian are able to keep pace with changes in the development landscape in Debian (e.g. more useful package diffing for source format v3 packages) and continue to be tools that are an integral part of package development in Debian. Some people (including me) would like a rolling distribution constantly usable by end-users. Do you think that the release process currently geared towards producing stable can be accommodated to support this? I m not yet convinced that the concept of a rolling, constantly usable distribution can be easily integrated in to the workflow that exists around preparing stable releases in Debian. The testing distribution was created as, and continues to be used as, a tool to enable the release team to create the next stable release that it happens to be something that people can use every day for much of the time is mostly a happy side-effect of the fact that we don t gratuitously break it, but is by no means guaranteed to be the case early in the release cycle or during large, disruptive, transitions. It s been suggested that testing and rolling could be basically the same for most of the cycle, with rolling then continuing to be updated when testing is frozen. This would essentially mean an extra suite which is only used for a few months every couple of years or so, which is one of the things that testing was intended to avoid (i.e. the old frozen suite) and seems like a lot of overhead to introduce in order to reduce disruption to some users during the freeze. The early part of the release cycle also tends to include a number of larger transitions which often require packages to either be removed from testing or broken as part of migrating the transition, if they are not able to be successfully updated in time. What s the biggest problem of Debian? The thing that I ve been noticing myself becoming frustrated by recently is a tendency to debate the minor details of proposals, rather than concentrating on getting the key points right to begin with. Clearly for some projects such as multiarch the details may be as important as the big picture, but in most cases the people working on a development should be allowed to look after the smaller details themselves. That s not meant to imply that feedback from other parts of the project should not be welcomed, simply that if we consider Debian to be a do-ocracy then we need to permit people the freedom to do . Is there someone in Debian that you admire for their contributions? All previous release managers, for making the job look much easier than it seems when you re in the hot seat . :-) Outside of the release team, Joey Hess for his contributions to various parts of the Debian development environment over the years, such as debhelper and debian-installer, and Colin Watson for his enviable willingness to tackle a wide variety of different projects within Debian.
Thank you to Adam for the time spent answering my questions. I hope you enjoyed reading his answers as I did. Subscribe to my newsletter to get my monthly summary of the Debian/Ubuntu news and to not miss further interviews. You can also follow along on Identi.ca, Twitter and Facebook.

No comment Liked this article? Click here. My blog is Flattr-enabled.