Debian Bug report logs - #585145
ITA: gtimelog -- minimal timelogging system

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org>

To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>

Cc: Dafydd Harries <daf@debian.org>

Subject: RFA: gtimelog -- minimal timelogging system

Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2010 15:49:54 +0100

Package: wnpp
Severity: normal

I request an adopter for the gtimelog package.

The package description is:
 gtimelog provides a time tracking application to allow the user to track what
 they work on during the day and how long they spend doing it.

I took over maintenance of gtimelog to use it at work, but my employer's
timesheet system now needs a forked version of gtimelog,
<http://git.collabora.co.uk/?p=gtimelog.git;a=summary>, and the changes from
this version aren't in a form amenable to being sent upstream. Rather than
pretending I still maintain the Debian package, it seems best to hand it over
to someone else.

Regards,
    Simon

Message #18 received at 585145@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org>

To: 585145@bugs.debian.org, Chris <racerx@makeworld.com>, Barry Warsaw <barry@python.org>

Cc: Steve McIntyre <93sam@debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#585145: RFA: gtimelog -- minimal timelogging system

Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 10:13:30 +0100

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Wed, 09 Jun 2010 at 15:49:54 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> I request an adopter for the gtimelog package.

Chris, have you made any progress since the version you sent me in early
August?

Barry Warsaw, an experienced Python developer, has also expressed interest in
taking over maintenance of gtimelog in Debian and Ubuntu; I think working with
him in one of the Debian Python packaging teams, using whatever version
control system that team prefers, would be an excellent way to maintain this
package.

Steve McIntyre has mentioned that he might be willing to sponsor uploads, so
I've Cc'd him.

    S
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=RbW0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Message #23 received at 585145@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Barry Warsaw <barry@python.org>

To: Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org>

Cc: 585145@bugs.debian.org, Chris <racerx@makeworld.com>, Steve McIntyre <93sam@debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#585145: RFA: gtimelog -- minimal timelogging system

Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 11:10:53 -0400

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Sep 14, 2010, at 10:13 AM, Simon McVittie wrote:

>On Wed, 09 Jun 2010 at 15:49:54 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
>> I request an adopter for the gtimelog package.
>
>Chris, have you made any progress since the version you sent me in
>early August?
>
>Barry Warsaw, an experienced Python developer, has also expressed
>interest in taking over maintenance of gtimelog in Debian and Ubuntu;
>I think working with him in one of the Debian Python packaging teams,
>using whatever version control system that team prefers, would be an
>excellent way to maintain this package.
>
>Steve McIntyre has mentioned that he might be willing to sponsor
>uploads, so I've Cc'd him.

Thanks Simon, and of course I'm very happy to work with Chris to maintain
gtimelog.  I've worked with Marius who gave me commit privileges to the
upstream bzr branches (I'm a member of ~gtimelog-dev on Launchpad) and I have
upload rights to the Cheeseshop entry.

I have a branch with all new (and simplified) packaging up on Launchpad for
0.4.0.  It's in a loom so you'll need the bzr-loom plugin to work with it.
I've switched over to quilt3.

https://code.launchpad.net/~gtimelog-dev/gtimelog/packaging

The packaging bits can be separated out for upload to Debian.  If you're able
to review that, it would be great.  Ideally, we'd get the new version into
Debian and sync it back to Ubuntu.  I'm certainly willing to assist with that.

Feel free to ping me on #debian-python to discuss further.  nick: barry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
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=Ojf5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Message #28 received at 585145@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Barry Warsaw <barry@wooz.org>

To: 585145@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org>, Chris <racerx@makeworld.com>, Steve McIntyre <93sam@debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#585145: RFA: gtimelog -- minimal timelogging system

Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 17:06:51 -0400

On Sep 14, 2010, at 11:10 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:

>>Barry Warsaw, an experienced Python developer, has also expressed
>>interest in taking over maintenance of gtimelog in Debian and Ubuntu;
>>I think working with him in one of the Debian Python packaging teams,
>>using whatever version control system that team prefers, would be an
>>excellent way to maintain this package.

Hi Chris,

Have you had any time to think about this?  I was able to get 0.4.0 in Ubuntu
Maverick, but of course it would be ideal to get it into Debian and sync it
from there.

Message #33 received at 585145@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris <racerx@makeworld.com>

To: 585145@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#585145: RFA: gtimelog -- minimal timelogging system

Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 22:16:47 -0500

On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 17:06:51 -0400
Barry Warsaw <barry@wooz.org> wrote:

> On Sep 14, 2010, at 11:10 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> 
> >>Barry Warsaw, an experienced Python developer, has also expressed
> >>interest in taking over maintenance of gtimelog in Debian and
> >>Ubuntu; I think working with him in one of the Debian Python
> >>packaging teams, using whatever version control system that team
> >>prefers, would be an excellent way to maintain this package.
> 
> Hi Chris,
> 
> Have you had any time to think about this?  I was able to get 0.4.0
> in Ubuntu Maverick, but of course it would be ideal to get it into
> Debian and sync it from there.
> 
> 
>

After taking a few weeks away from trying to become a DM, I have
decided that my schedule does not allow for maintaining along with
the fact that I am no longer interested in maintaining packages for
Debian. You may do what you wish with the package.

-- 
Best regards,

Chris
1AB5FEF8

Message #38 received at 585145@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Barry Warsaw <barry@python.org>

To: 585145@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Chris <racerx@makeworld.com>

Subject: Re: Bug#585145: RFA: gtimelog -- minimal timelogging system

Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 08:13:49 -0400

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Sep 27, 2010, at 10:16 PM, Chris wrote:

>After taking a few weeks away from trying to become a DM, I have
>decided that my schedule does not allow for maintaining along with
>the fact that I am no longer interested in maintaining packages for
>Debian. You may do what you wish with the package.

Chris, thanks for your contributions to Debian, and good luck!

I am happy to take over maintenance of gtimelog if Steve is still willing to
sponsor uploads.

-Barry

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #45 received at 585145@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Lars Wirzenius <liw@liw.fi>

To: 585145@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Barry Warsaw <barry@python.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#585145: RFA: gtimelog -- minimal timelogging system

Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2011 09:58:17 +0000

Hi, Barry,

I'd be happy to sponsor your gtimelog uploads to Debian.

Message #50 received at 585145@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org>

To: Lars Wirzenius <liw@liw.fi>, 585145@bugs.debian.org, Barry Warsaw <barry@python.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#585145: RFA: gtimelog -- minimal timelogging system

Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 16:17:08 +0100

On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 at 09:58:17 +0000, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> Hi, Barry,
> 
> I'd be happy to sponsor your gtimelog uploads to Debian.

Any news on this? I notice there's a newer-still version in Ubuntu now. Could
someone please take this package away from me? :-)

Sorry, I can't test gtimelog enough to maintain or sponsor it myself, since
I have to use a fork of it for work; but if you're having trouble finding a
sponsor, perhaps the Python applications team can help?

Regards,
    S

Message #55 received at 585145@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Barry Warsaw <barry@python.org>

To: Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org>

Cc: Lars Wirzenius <liw@liw.fi>, 585145@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#585145: RFA: gtimelog -- minimal timelogging system

Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 12:57:19 -0400

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Jul 12, 2011, at 04:17 PM, Simon McVittie wrote:

>On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 at 09:58:17 +0000, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
>> Hi, Barry,
>> 
>> I'd be happy to sponsor your gtimelog uploads to Debian.
>
>Any news on this? I notice there's a newer-still version in Ubuntu now. Could
>someone please take this package away from me? :-)
>
>Sorry, I can't test gtimelog enough to maintain or sponsor it myself, since
>I have to use a fork of it for work; but if you're having trouble finding a
>sponsor, perhaps the Python applications team can help?

Sorry, I suck.  I'm just now recovering from a system crash, but will try to
push an update asap.

-Barry

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #60 received at 585145@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Barry Warsaw <barry@python.org>

To: Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org>

Cc: Lars Wirzenius <liw@liw.fi>, 585145@bugs.debian.org, marius@pov.lt

Subject: Re: Bug#585145: RFA: gtimelog -- minimal timelogging system

Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2011 16:28:29 -0400

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Jul 12, 2011, at 04:17 PM, Simon McVittie wrote:

>On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 at 09:58:17 +0000, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
>> Hi, Barry,
>> 
>> I'd be happy to sponsor your gtimelog uploads to Debian.
>
>Any news on this? I notice there's a newer-still version in Ubuntu now. Could
>someone please take this package away from me? :-)
>
>Sorry, I can't test gtimelog enough to maintain or sponsor it myself, since
>I have to use a fork of it for work; but if you're having trouble finding a
>sponsor, perhaps the Python applications team can help?

Well, I've *finally* gotten around to fixing a few bug in the Launchpad
tracker, and I might still get to a couple more based on some feedback.  I'd
like to do an 0.6.0 release this week or next, if Marius doesn't object.  At
that point I'll do the upload to Ubuntu and ping Lars to sponsor an upload to
Debian.

Sound good?
-Barry

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #65 received at 585145@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Lars Wirzenius <liw@liw.fi>

To: Barry Warsaw <barry@python.org>

Cc: Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org>, 585145@bugs.debian.org, marius@pov.lt

Subject: Re: Bug#585145: RFA: gtimelog -- minimal timelogging system

Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 10:02:47 +0100

On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 04:28:29PM -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Jul 12, 2011, at 04:17 PM, Simon McVittie wrote:
> 
> >On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 at 09:58:17 +0000, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> >> Hi, Barry,
> >> 
> >> I'd be happy to sponsor your gtimelog uploads to Debian.
> >
> >Any news on this? I notice there's a newer-still version in Ubuntu now. Could
> >someone please take this package away from me? :-)
> >
> >Sorry, I can't test gtimelog enough to maintain or sponsor it myself, since
> >I have to use a fork of it for work; but if you're having trouble finding a
> >sponsor, perhaps the Python applications team can help?
> 
> Well, I've *finally* gotten around to fixing a few bug in the Launchpad
> tracker, and I might still get to a couple more based on some feedback.  I'd
> like to do an 0.6.0 release this week or next, if Marius doesn't object.  At
> that point I'll do the upload to Ubuntu and ping Lars to sponsor an upload to
> Debian.
> 
> Sound good?

I no longer use gtimelog, but I can sponsor an upload to Debian.
It might be good to move it into the Python application team in
Debian, so it's easy to find sponsors.

Barry, e-mail me the source package when you need an upload, please.

-- 
Freedom-based blog/wiki/web hosting: http://www.branchable.com/

Message #70 received at 585145@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Barry Warsaw <barry@python.org>

To: 585145@bugs.debian.org

Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 14:26:41 -0400

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

I just wanted to follow up since I released a new gtimelog (0.7.0) both
upstream and for Ubuntu 11.10.  A couple of things:

 * The Vcs-Bzr branch is in an older bzr format.  I'd like to get that
   upgraded to 2a if that's feasible.  Any objections?
 * Can I change Maintainer: to point to myself?
 * I don't think the Oneiric version will port straight over to Sid because
   Ubuntu seems to be ahead of Debian with some of the dependencies.

Maybe we need to get the new version into experimental, where I think the
dependencies can be satisfied.  From the d/control file:

Package: gtimelog
Architecture: all
Depends: gir1.2-appindicator3-0.1,
         gir1.2-gtk-3.0,
         gir1.2-pango-1.0 (>= 1.29.3+git20110916),
         python-gobject (>= 2.90),
         ${misc:Depends},
         ${python:Depends}

 * experimental has python-gobject 2.90.3-2 (unstable has 2.28.6-5).
 * gir1.2-pango-1.0 and gir1.2-gtk-3.0 both seem okay in unstable.
 * afaict, gir1.2-appindicator3-0.1 isn't available in Debian at all.

I'll try to build a version w/o appindicator and see if I can get that
installed and running in experimental.

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #75 received at 585145@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org>

To: Barry Warsaw <barry@python.org>, 585145@bugs.debian.org, Lars Wirzenius <liw@liw.fi>

Subject: Re: Bug#585145: gtimelog in Debian

Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:03:25 +0100

On Thu, 06 Oct 2011 at 14:26:41 -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> I just wanted to follow up since I released a new gtimelog (0.7.0) both
> upstream and for Ubuntu 11.10.

(FYI, neither I nor Lars will be notified if you just mail the bug: for bugs
in normal Debian packages, the maintainer is automatically contacted, but
the maintainer of the wnpp pseudo-package is a mailing list or something, and
has little to do with individual wnpp bugs.)

>  * The Vcs-Bzr branch is in an older bzr format.  I'd like to get that
>    upgraded to 2a if that's feasible.  Any objections?

Whatever you think is best, as far as I'm concerned.

>  * Can I change Maintainer: to point to myself?

Yes, if you're taking responsibility for the package, please do. Lars (or
anyone else interested) might well want to be in Uploaders as a co-maintainer.

You could also move it to Python applications team maintenance if you like:
the Python teams might be a good source of sponsors (although they might
also insist that you use svn).

>  * I don't think the Oneiric version will port straight over to Sid because
>    Ubuntu seems to be ahead of Debian with some of the dependencies.

Ah, if 0.7.0 needs GNOME 3 then that complicates things - the GNOME 3
transition in unstable is still in progress.

> Maybe we need to get the new version into experimental, where I think the
> dependencies can be satisfied.  From the d/control file:
> 
> Package: gtimelog
> Architecture: all
> Depends: gir1.2-appindicator3-0.1,
>          gir1.2-gtk-3.0,
>          gir1.2-pango-1.0 (>= 1.29.3+git20110916),
>          python-gobject (>= 2.90),
>          ${misc:Depends},
>          ${python:Depends}
> 
>  * experimental has python-gobject 2.90.3-2 (unstable has 2.28.6-5).
>  * gir1.2-pango-1.0 and gir1.2-gtk-3.0 both seem okay in unstable.
>  * afaict, gir1.2-appindicator3-0.1 isn't available in Debian at all.
> 
> I'll try to build a version w/o appindicator and see if I can get that
> installed and running in experimental.

Uploading to experimental sounds like the best plan for now. I suspect
appindicator isn't vital functionality - if I understand Ubuntu correctly,
it's a replacement for the tray icon, so one easy fallback if appindicator was
missing would be to have a traditional tray icon, and another would be to
not have a tray-icon-like-thing at all.

I'm getting very tempted to ask for gtimelog to be removed from unstable
(and hence testing) until a better version like 0.7.0 can go in - anyone
who's desperate enough can get 0.0+svn88 from stable, and having the
package available in unstable in the meantime gives a false indication
of its quality. As long as it's in the archive *somewhere* (e.g. stable and/or
experimental), you shouldn't have to go through the NEW queue to reinstate it
when it's ready.

    S

Message #80 received at 585145@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org>

To: Barry Warsaw <barry@python.org>, 585145@bugs.debian.org, Lars Wirzenius <liw@liw.fi>

Subject: Re: Bug#585145: gtimelog in Debian

Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 11:16:44 +0000

On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 at 10:03:25 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Thu, 06 Oct 2011 at 14:26:41 -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> >  * experimental has python-gobject 2.90.3-2 (unstable has 2.28.6-5).
> >  * gir1.2-pango-1.0 and gir1.2-gtk-3.0 both seem okay in unstable.
> >  * afaict, gir1.2-appindicator3-0.1 isn't available in Debian at all.
> > 
> > I'll try to build a version w/o appindicator and see if I can get that
> > installed and running in experimental.
> 
> Uploading to experimental sounds like the best plan for now. I suspect
> appindicator isn't vital functionality - if I understand Ubuntu correctly,
> it's a replacement for the tray icon, so one easy fallback if appindicator was
> missing would be to have a traditional tray icon, and another would be to
> not have a tray-icon-like-thing at all.

Any progress on this?

experimental now has pygobject 3.0.2-2 - I assume this will go to unstable
as part of GNOME 3.2, but you'd have to ask the GNOME team about that.

> I'm getting very tempted to ask for gtimelog to be removed from unstable
> (and hence testing) until a better version like 0.7.0 can go in - anyone
> who's desperate enough can get 0.0+svn88 from stable, and having the
> package available in unstable in the meantime gives a false indication
> of its quality.

I'll do this next week if there are no objections.

    S

Message #85 received at 585145@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Barry Warsaw <barry@python.org>

To: Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org>, 585145@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Lars Wirzenius <liw@liw.fi>

Subject: Re: Bug#585145: gtimelog in Debian

Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 06:51:00 -0500

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Nov 18, 2011, at 11:16 AM, Simon McVittie wrote:

>Any progress on this?
>
>experimental now has pygobject 3.0.2-2 - I assume this will go to unstable
>as part of GNOME 3.2, but you'd have to ask the GNOME team about that.

Ah sorry, not yet.  UDS basically distracted me.  I'll work on that next week
though.

>> I'm getting very tempted to ask for gtimelog to be removed from unstable
>> (and hence testing) until a better version like 0.7.0 can go in - anyone
>> who's desperate enough can get 0.0+svn88 from stable, and having the
>> package available in unstable in the meantime gives a false indication
>> of its quality.
>
>I'll do this next week if there are no objections.

I think this makes sense, if it won't be too hard to re-inject the new version
when I have it ready.

Cheers,
-Barry

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #90 received at 585145@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org>

To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>

Cc: 585145@bugs.debian.org

Subject: RM: gtimelog -- ROM; orphaned, badly outdated

Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 17:05:20 +0000

Package: ftp.debian.org
Severity: normal
X-Debbugs-Cc: Barry Warsaw <barry@python.org>, Lars Wirzenius <liw@liw.fi>

I don't think gtimelog should be in wheezy or sid in its current
state. ftp-masters, please remove gtimelog 0.0+svn88 from sid (this isn't
*exactly* RoM, because I no longer maintain gtimelog as explained in #585145,
but it seems close enough).

X-Debbugs-Cc to the prospective new maintainer (and Ubuntu maintainer),
and his potential sponsor: please don't let this prevent you from uploading
0.7.0 to experimental, and unstable when the required pygobject gets into
the archive. WNPP bug also cc'd.

    S

Message #95 received at 585145-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Debian FTP Masters <ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org>

To: 492988-done@bugs.debian.org,502324-done@bugs.debian.org,512471-done@bugs.debian.org,520516-done@bugs.debian.org,560981-done@bugs.debian.org,572017-done@bugs.debian.org,581938-done@bugs.debian.org,592424-done@bugs.debian.org,595280-done@bugs.debian.org,585145-done@bugs.debian.org,591078-done@bugs.debian.org,

Cc: gtimelog@packages.debian.org, gtimelog@packages.qa.debian.org

Subject: Bug#649608: Removed package(s) from unstable

Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 22:16:02 +0000

Version: 0.0+svn88-3+rm

Dear submitter,

as the package gtimelog has just been removed from the Debian archive
unstable we hereby close the associated bug reports.  We are sorry
that we couldn't deal with your issue properly.

For details on the removal, please see http://bugs.debian.org/649608

The version of this package that was in Debian prior to this removal
can still be found using http://snapshot.debian.org/.

This message was generated automatically; if you believe that there is
a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing
ftpmaster@debian.org.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Luca Falavigna (the ftpmaster behind the curtain)

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.