Search Results: "Pascal Hakim"

6 March 2008

Anthony Towns: The second half...

Continuing from where we left off… The lower bound for me becoming a DD was 8th Feb ‘98 when I applied; for comparison, the upper bound as best I can make out was 23rd Feb, when I would have received this mail through the debian-private list:
Resent-Date: 23 Feb 1998 18:18:57 -0000
From: Martin Schulze 
To: Debian Private 
Subject: New accepted maintainers
Hi folks,
I wish you a pleasant beginning of the week.  Here are the first good
news of the week (probably).
This is the weekly progress report about new-maintainers.  These people
have been accepted as new maintainer for Debian GNU/Linux within the
last week.
Anthony Towns <>
    Anthony is going to package the personal proxy from - we don't have the source... He may adopt the
    transproxy package, too.
I never did adopt transproxy – apparently Adam Heath started fixing bugs in it a few days later anyway, and it was later taken over by Bernd Eckenfels (ifconfig upstream!) who’s maintained it ever since. Obviously I did do other things instead, which brings us back to where we left off…
Geez, this was meant to be briefer...

28 January 2008

Martin F. Krafft: Consolidating packaging workflows across distros

I speculate that most of what we do for Debian squares with what others do for their respective distro. Thus, it should be possible to identify a conceptual workflow applicable to all distros, consolidate individual workflows on a per-package basis, and profit from each other. Jonathan let me have the after-afternoon-coffee slot of the Distro Summit for an impromptu discussion on the various workflows used by distros for packaging. The discussion round was very short-notice and despite the announcement sent to the conference mailing list, only ten people showed up: two people familiar with Fedora, and ( versus ) eight Debianites. Regardless, I think the discussion was success- and fruitful. We were able to identify a one-to-one mapping between the Fedora and Debian workflows, even though we use different techniques: Many Debian package maintainers use version control systems to maintain the ./debian directory, and if patch files are stored in ./debian/patches/, then Debian and Fedora both store patch files in a version control repository, which seems awful. Just as I am only one of many who are experimenting with VCS-based workflows for Debian packaging, the Fedora people are also considering the use of version control for packaging. Unlike Fedora, who seem to try to standardise on bzr, I try to cater for the plethora of version control systems in use in Debian, anticipating the impossibility of standardising/converging on a single tool across the entire project. It seems that our two projects are both at the start of a new phase in packaging, a paradigm shift . What better time could there be for us to listen to each other and come up with a workflow that works for both projects? My suggestion currently centres around a common repository for each package across all (participating) distros, and feature branches. Specifically, given an upstream source tree, modifications made during packaging for a given distro fall into four categories: Given a version control system with sufficient branching support, I imagine having different namespaces for branches: upstream-patches/*, distro/*, rpm/* or debian/*. Now, when building the Debian package, I d apply upstream-patches/*, distro/*, deb/* and debian/* in order, while my colleague from the Fedora project would apply upstream-patches/*, distro/*, rpm/* and fedora/*, before calling the build tools and uploading the package. There are surely problems to be overcome. Pascal Hakim mentioned patch dependencies, and I can t necessarily say with a clear conscience that my workflow isn t too complicated to be unleashed into the public yet. But if we find a conceptual workflow applicable to more than one distro, it should be possible to implement a higher-level tool to implement it. Also, the above is basically patch maintenance, not the entire workflow. Bug tracking system integration is going to play a role, as well as other aspects of daily distro packaging. I ll leave those for future time. For me, this is the start of a potentially fruitful cooperation and I hope that interested parties from other distros jump on. For now, I suggest my mailing list for discussion. You can also find some links on the Debian wiki.

4 August 2006

Pascal Hakim:

One of the things I've been working on, on and off for the last few months is Along with a few others, we felt that there were not enough options for Debian-related mailing list hosting. While this may seem strange to some, a number of people at DebConf5 found the idea to be worthwhile. Most Debian-related lists which would not be considered for could find hosting at instead. The main purposes behind are:
To request a new mailing list, simply follow the instructions on Of course, like any free software project, there are still some things which are needed. The main one is currently the lack of a public web archive for lists which want it. I wanted to try to replace MHonArc with something that looked a little better and was more user-friendly, but I have yet to find something which I think would be an appropriate replacement. While some have suggested Lurker, I feel that is not very useable in a long term hosting environment, as it is harder to navigate around older entries. While this is acceptable in some places, it's definitely not in others. You can consider a "Dear Lazyweb" paragraph if you wish. Many thanks to Andreas Barth and Martin Zobel-Helas for their help in setting this up, providing machine space, and prodding me along when necessary.

22 June 2006

Christian Perrier: news entry about Dzongkha Linux

After the DzongkhaLnux launch event which I already blogged about as well as published a report in debian-devel-announce, I got interviewed by They turned this interview into one of their head stories, which IMHO gives Debian an interesting exposure. Moreover, I am very happy of the way they wrote the story, which gives Debian the credit it deserves in that story and gives a very good transcription of my own ideas about free software. It also puts yet more exposure on the Bhutanese authorities initiative and I think they really deserve it as well. Thanks indeed to Pascal Hakim who made this possible and to Dahna McConnachie who wrote the news entry and conducted the interview.

23 November 2005

Pascal Hakim: Vacuum Cleaners?

I never thought I would see the day where I would actually find a vacuum cleaner cool. So... Who's going to be the first to put Debian on it?