* Sup in Debian
@ 2014-08-25 21:34 Per Andersson
2014-08-26 8:34 ` [sup] " Gaute Hope
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Per Andersson @ 2014-08-25 21:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: supmua
Hi!
I am the maintainer for the Sup package in Debian, sup-mail.
There are a few open questions which, together with lack of
time, have ended up in the situation where sup-mail was
removed from Debian.
I want to reintroduce it of course.
The questions:
I can't find if rmail and rmail-sup have merged upstream.
Is there any activity in 1) original rmail, 2) migration away
from rmail?
What are the difference between rmail and rmail-sup?
(I am thinking that maybe the Debian package should switch
upstream source from rmail to rmail-sup.)
The last package in Debian (stable) is 0.12.1, what is the
migration path to current release, 0.19.0?
--
Per
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [sup] Sup in Debian
2014-08-25 21:34 Sup in Debian Per Andersson
@ 2014-08-26 8:34 ` Gaute Hope
2014-09-02 15:05 ` Caitlin Matos
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Gaute Hope @ 2014-08-26 8:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Per Andersson; +Cc: supmua
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:34 PM, Per Andersson <avtobiff@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I am the maintainer for the Sup package in Debian, sup-mail.
>
> There are a few open questions which, together with lack of
> time, have ended up in the situation where sup-mail was
> removed from Debian.
>
> I want to reintroduce it of course.
Yay!
> The questions:
>
> I can't find if rmail and rmail-sup have merged upstream.
> Is there any activity in 1) original rmail, 2) migration away
> from rmail?
No. I am afraid not.
> What are the difference between rmail and rmail-sup?
https://github.com/sup-heliotrope/rmail-sup/compare/upstream_matta...master
> (I am thinking that maybe the Debian package should switch
> upstream source from rmail to rmail-sup.)
>
> The last package in Debian (stable) is 0.12.1, what is the
> migration path to current release, 0.19.0?
https://github.com/sup-heliotrope/sup/wiki/Migration-0.13-to-0.14
But the migration script for the config files does not work with newer
versions of Ruby, that means you need to re-create your config set up.
0.12.1 is way out of date! It is, unfortunately, beyond the time I've
had to maintain a clean migration path from it up to the current
release. It is from pre ruby 1.9.
Something like this should work:
o. back up ~/.sup and remove the config files from ~/.sup
o. use sup-dump to back up the index
o. upgrade sup
o. manually recreate the config either using sup-config or by hand
o. set up sources.yaml to match your previous sources.yaml
o. new sup should work with the db, make sure that _source ids_ match
in new configs!!
o. alternatively, re-index and sup-import the dump.
Cheers, Gaute
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [sup] Sup in Debian
2014-08-26 8:34 ` [sup] " Gaute Hope
@ 2014-09-02 15:05 ` Caitlin Matos
2014-09-03 7:30 ` Gaute Hope
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Caitlin Matos @ 2014-09-02 15:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: supmua; +Cc: avtobiff
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2688 bytes --]
Hi Gaute,
A few days ago, I updated that wiki migration page to better reflect what a
user can do if using Ruby 2.1. I did this specifically with the intent of
redirecting Debian users who are updating.
However, I updated it to the best of my understanding. Having not worked
with syck, I am unfamiliar with the differences. In researching the issue
via Google, I was under the impression that simply leaving the config files
as-is would likely suffice. If you believe this is not the case, please
update what I wrote on the wiki!
I tried creating a configuration with both 0.12.1 and 0.19.0, and there
were no obvious differences in the files themselves. Can you clarify what
should be changed if one was to manually recreate the config by hand?
Thanks,
Caitlin (Debian Ruby team)
On Tuesday, August 26, 2014 4:34:15 AM UTC-4, Gaute Hope wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:34 PM, Per Andersson <avto...@gmail.com
> <javascript:>> wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > I am the maintainer for the Sup package in Debian, sup-mail.
> >
> > There are a few open questions which, together with lack of
> > time, have ended up in the situation where sup-mail was
> > removed from Debian.
> >
> > I want to reintroduce it of course.
>
> Yay!
>
>
> > The questions:
> >
> > I can't find if rmail and rmail-sup have merged upstream.
> > Is there any activity in 1) original rmail, 2) migration away
> > from rmail?
>
> No. I am afraid not.
>
> > What are the difference between rmail and rmail-sup?
>
> https://github.com/sup-heliotrope/rmail-sup/compare/upstream_matta...master
>
> > (I am thinking that maybe the Debian package should switch
> > upstream source from rmail to rmail-sup.)
> >
> > The last package in Debian (stable) is 0.12.1, what is the
> > migration path to current release, 0.19.0?
>
> https://github.com/sup-heliotrope/sup/wiki/Migration-0.13-to-0.14
>
> But the migration script for the config files does not work with newer
> versions of Ruby, that means you need to re-create your config set up.
>
> 0.12.1 is way out of date! It is, unfortunately, beyond the time I've
> had to maintain a clean migration path from it up to the current
> release. It is from pre ruby 1.9.
>
> Something like this should work:
>
> o. back up ~/.sup and remove the config files from ~/.sup
> o. use sup-dump to back up the index
> o. upgrade sup
> o. manually recreate the config either using sup-config or by hand
> o. set up sources.yaml to match your previous sources.yaml
> o. new sup should work with the db, make sure that _source ids_ match
> in new configs!!
> o. alternatively, re-index and sup-import the dump.
>
>
>
> Cheers, Gaute
>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 4314 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [sup] Sup in Debian
2014-09-02 15:05 ` Caitlin Matos
@ 2014-09-03 7:30 ` Gaute Hope
2014-10-02 6:17 ` Per Andersson
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Gaute Hope @ 2014-09-03 7:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Caitlin Matos; +Cc: supmua, Per Andersson
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 5:05 PM, Caitlin Matos <cm.debian@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Gaute,
>
> A few days ago, I updated that wiki migration page to better reflect what a
> user can do if using Ruby 2.1. I did this specifically with the intent of
> redirecting Debian users who are updating.
>
> However, I updated it to the best of my understanding. Having not worked
> with syck, I am unfamiliar with the differences. In researching the issue
> via Google, I was under the impression that simply leaving the config files
> as-is would likely suffice. If you believe this is not the case, please
> update what I wrote on the wiki!
As far as I can remember this is not guaranteed, I think it depends on
what combination of ruby and sup you created the configuration files
with initially.
> I tried creating a configuration with both 0.12.1 and 0.19.0, and there were
> no obvious differences in the files themselves. Can you clarify what should
> be changed if one was to manually recreate the config by hand?
I think the difference will become most apparent when using Ruby <1.8
and Ruby latest with latest Sup. The structure of the YAML file
changed, I no longer remember all the details, but the following
issues and pull requests contain the work we did on it, have a look at
#258 (also listed below) on how one user got around the issue after
the script stopped working:
Deprecation of YAML migration script:
- https://github.com/sup-heliotrope/sup/pull/268
- https://github.com/sup-heliotrope/sup/issues/266
Migration after the migration script stopped working:
- https://github.com/sup-heliotrope/sup/issues/258
Issues leading to the migration script:
- https://github.com/sup-heliotrope/sup/pull/75
- https://github.com/sup-heliotrope/sup/pull/62
- https://github.com/sup-heliotrope/sup/issues/17
- https://github.com/sup-heliotrope/sup/pull/16
One important thing to remember when doing this manually is to set the
source ids to the same as they were before - that is - matching ids in
in sources.yaml before and after migration (when manually migrating,
recreating config files). This way the source id in the index will be
correct. Otherwise things will get messy. If it works for the user to
just upgrade sup and reopen that's great, but otherwise I would
suggest running through the configuration - re-add the sources, modify
source.yaml so that the ids are matching.
A lot of stuff has happened since 0.12.0 and the upgrade path is no
longer very smooth.
Hope that helped a little.
Cheers, Gaute
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [sup] Sup in Debian
2014-09-03 7:30 ` Gaute Hope
@ 2014-10-02 6:17 ` Per Andersson
2014-10-02 15:23 ` Gaute Hope
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Per Andersson @ 2014-10-02 6:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gaute Hope; +Cc: Caitlin Matos, supmua
Hi!
Sup 0.19.0 is now uploaded to Debian (unstable) and will
migrate to testing in a few days (although since Sup was
removed the package tracker is confused). [0]
Next thing on my wishlist is that the man pages from the
wiki are built and included in a Sup release. (So we can
drop the man pages that Debian provides and use the
upstream man pages.)
Is it possible to do a point release anytime soon with
man pages? The Debian freeze is coming early November
IIRC.
[0] https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/sup-mail
--
Per
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [sup] Sup in Debian
2014-10-02 6:17 ` Per Andersson
@ 2014-10-02 15:23 ` Gaute Hope
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Gaute Hope @ 2014-10-02 15:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: supmua, Per Andersson
Excerpts from Per Andersson's message of October 2, 2014 8:17:
> Sup 0.19.0 is now uploaded to Debian (unstable) and will
> migrate to testing in a few days (although since Sup was
> removed the package tracker is confused). [0]
Cool!
> Next thing on my wishlist is that the man pages from the
> wiki are built and included in a Sup release. (So we can
> drop the man pages that Debian provides and use the
> upstream man pages.)
>
> Is it possible to do a point release anytime soon with
> man pages? The Debian freeze is coming early November
> IIRC.
Definetely !
- gaute
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-10-02 15:22 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-08-25 21:34 Sup in Debian Per Andersson
2014-08-26 8:34 ` [sup] " Gaute Hope
2014-09-02 15:05 ` Caitlin Matos
2014-09-03 7:30 ` Gaute Hope
2014-10-02 6:17 ` Per Andersson
2014-10-02 15:23 ` Gaute Hope
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox