Bug#941016: ITP: gnome-firmware-updater -- GTK tool to upgrade, downgrade, and reinstall firmware on devices supported by fwupd

[Mike Gabriel]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Mike Gabriel <***@das-netzwerkteam.de>

* Package name : gnome-firmware-updater
Version : 3.34.0
Upstream Author : Richard Hughes (https://gitlab.gnome.org/hughsie)
* URL : https://gitlab.gnome.org/hughsie/gnome-firmware-updater/
* License : GPL-2+
Programming Lang: C
Description : GTK tool to upgrade, downgrade, and reinstall firmware on devices supported by fwupd

With this application you can:
.
- upgrade, downgrade, and reinstall firmware on devices supported by fwupd
- Unlock locked fwupd devices
- Verify firmware on supported devices
- Display all releases for a fwupd device
.
This application will be maintained by the MATE packaging team. If
people from the GNOME team want to chime in, please give us notice.

[Mike Gabriel]

Hi Jesper,

Hello Mike,

Post by Mike Gabriel
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Mike Gabriel
* Package name : gnome-firmware-updater
Version : 3.34.0
Upstream Author : Richard Hughes (https://gitlab.gnome.org/hughsie)
* URL : https://gitlab.gnome.org/hughsie/gnome-firmware-updater/
* License : GPL-2+
Programming Lang: C
Description : GTK tool to upgrade, downgrade, and reinstall
firmware on devices supported by fwupd
.
- upgrade, downgrade, and reinstall firmware on devices supported by fwupd
- Unlock locked fwupd devices
- Verify firmware on supported devices
- Display all releases for a fwupd device
.
This application will be maintained by the MATE packaging team. If
people from the GNOME team want to chime in, please give us notice.

I have some packaging in the works which build and installs fine,
but there are a few things still left to do like getting manpages to
https://salsa.debian.org/jespermd-guest/gnome-firmware
I would like to become a Debian package maintainer and thought this
might be a good
starting point. I have a sponsor ready.
Best regards,
Jesper Derander

Thanks for working on this. As ITP holder, I'd prefer being the
uploading sponsor myself. This piece of work will be funded by Ubuntu
MATE and if not packaging the software myself, it may make sense to
invest the time on sponsoring and reviewing your work.

Let me know, if it is ok with your current sponsor to hand over
sponsoring and reviewing to me. (Who is it by the way?)

Is that ok with you? I'll be happy to support your process of becoming
a Debian package maintainer.

light+love
Mike

[Mike Gabriel]

Hi Jesper,
(Cc:ing Martin Wimpress from Ubuntu MATE)

I'm ok with that. Thank you for taking your time, I will do my best to
help. I've applied some upstream patches that fix
the manpage issue and i've also taken care of the lintian issues.
looking forward to hearing your review comments soon!

Here comes the review:

1.
src:pkg name: upstream names it gnome-firmware-updater, so why do you
name it gnome-firmware

2.
bin:pkg name: same as with src:pkg name

3.
debian/control:

- SYNOPSIS: gtk front end for fwupd -> GTK
- LONG_DESCRIPTION: indent the itemizations by two characters
- LONG_DESCRIPTION: why don't you use the wording from
upstream's README.md file? Please do.

https://gitlab.gnome.org/hughsie/gnome-firmware-updater/blob/master/README.md
- Build-Depends: please add a comma after the last pkg name, it
makes diffs look nicer
one the line below Build-Depends gets changed (e.g. with another pkg name)
- Vcs-*: fields are missing, we should put the pkg on salsa under
the debian/ folder
- Depends: field, I recommend having one package per row.
- Please use appropriate upper case and lower case letters

debian/copyright:

- personally, I don't like the "Files: *" debian/copyright style,
but ftpmaster
wave it through, so...
- Source: field: no URL with a release number here, I'd put the
releases/ folder
here as URL or even better, the GitLab repo.

A general thing: you did good, but for other packages you might
maintain... I normally
use all licenses appearing in the upstream code for debian/.


debian/changelog:

- my spelling: "Initial release to Debian. (Closes: #941016)."
-> thus, using full-stops

4.
The pristine-tar branch is not on salsa, I cannot build without that
branch using gbp-buildpackage.

There are three options now:

(a) you work on those bits and pieces and I take a second look
(b) you are ok with me adding some commits
(c) a mixture of (a) and (b)

We should created an empty Git repo (gnome-firmware-updater) under
salsa.debian.org/debian (I can do that, if you agree) and push a clone
of your Git repo there. Please let me know if you are ok with
continueing using that repository as the official packaging VCS
location.

Another option would be placing the packaging Git repo onto the Debian
GNOME team's namespace on GitLab, but gnome-firmware-updater has
"gnome" in its name, but as I learned from upstream, it is a suitable
add-on tool for all GTK-based desktop environments, so a "neutral"
spot like the /debian team folder salsa is probably the better way to
go.

Also, Martin Wimpress from Ubuntu MATE and I would like to add
ourselves as uploaders. Furthermore, I recommend adding the Debian
GNOME team and the Debian+Ubuntu MATE team as uploaders, too. In old
times, most Debian packages had been 1-person-maintained, which turned
out to be a bad concept in case devs went missing in action (MIA).
Allowing team uploads to packages makes Debian a much more flexible
place to be at. Please let me know, if you are ok with this, too.

Thanks for your work!
Mike

[m***@das-netzwerkteam.de]

Hi Jesper,

Hi Mike,
Thank you for a detailed review!

Post by Mike Gabriel
Hi Jesper,
(Cc:ing Martin Wimpress from Ubuntu MATE)

I'm ok with that. Thank you for taking your time, I will do my best to
help. I've applied some upstream patches that fix
the manpage issue and i've also taken care of the lintian issues.
looking forward to hearing your review comments soon!

1.
src:pkg name: upstream names it gnome-firmware-updater, so why do you
name it gnome-firmware
2.
bin:pkg name: same as with src:pkg name
3.
- SYNOPSIS: gtk front end for fwupd -> GTK
- LONG_DESCRIPTION: indent the itemizations by two characters
- LONG_DESCRIPTION: why don't you use the wording from
upstream's README.md file? Please do.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/hughsie/gnome-firmware-updater/blob/master/README.md
- Build-Depends: please add a comma after the last pkg name, it
makes diffs look nicer
one the line below Build-Depends gets changed (e.g. with another pkg name)
- Vcs-*: fields are missing, we should put the pkg on salsa under
the debian/ folder
- Depends: field, I recommend having one package per row.
- Please use appropriate upper case and lower case letters
- personally, I don't like the "Files: *" debian/copyright style,
but ftpmaster
wave it through, so...
- Source: field: no URL with a release number here, I'd put the
releases/ folder
here as URL or even better, the GitLab repo.
A general thing: you did good, but for other packages you might
maintain... I normally
use all licenses appearing in the upstream code for debian/.
- my spelling: "Initial release to Debian. (Closes: #941016)."
-> thus, using full-stops
4.
The pristine-tar branch is not on salsa, I cannot build without that
branch using gbp-buildpackage.
(a) you work on those bits and pieces and I take a second look
(b) you are ok with me adding some commits
(c) a mixture of (a) and (b)
We should created an empty Git repo (gnome-firmware-updater) under
salsa.debian.org/debian (I can do that, if you agree) and push a clone
of your Git repo there. Please let me know if you are ok with
continueing using that repository as the official packaging VCS
location.
Another option would be placing the packaging Git repo onto the Debian
GNOME team's namespace on GitLab, but gnome-firmware-updater has
"gnome" in its name, but as I learned from upstream, it is a suitable
add-on tool for all GTK-based desktop environments, so a "neutral"
spot like the /debian team folder salsa is probably the better way to
go.
Also, Martin Wimpress from Ubuntu MATE and I would like to add
ourselves as uploaders. Furthermore, I recommend adding the Debian
GNOME team and the Debian+Ubuntu MATE team as uploaders, too. In old
times, most Debian packages had been 1-person-maintained, which turned
out to be a bad concept in case devs went missing in action (MIA).
Allowing team uploads to packages makes Debian a much more flexible
place to be at. Please let me know, if you are ok with this, too.
Thanks for your work!
Mike

https://gitlab.gnome.org/hughsie/gnome-firmware-updater/commit/55705a55e930e4ecb14fc5ae122bbbad9042f03b

Ah, ok. Your package name makes more sense, then.

It seems like this is the current and future package name so I suggest keeping it.

Yes.

If you're okay with it, I'd be happy to take the time and fix these issues myself, that way I can learn how to do these
things properly (so, option a). I'll try to do it as soon as possible.

Ok, please do, then. Thanks!

I'm okay with moving the repo under /debian/gnome-firmware but perhaps I could tidy up a bit first. I plan to use the
dep14 structure like they do with the gnome-shell package. Perhaps we can move it after the initial packaging is complete?

Yes. Ok.

Are you okay with having a second look once I have a new revision ready?

Yes, ping for the next review iteration. Thanks.

I'll let you know when it's done. I'll make sure
to add you and Martin as uploaders by then.

Great!

Best regards,
Jesper Derander

light+love
Mike

--
Gesende

[Mike Gabriel]

HI Jesper,

Are you okay with having a second look once I have a new revision
ready? I'll let you know when it's done. I'll make sure
to add you and Martin as uploaders by then.

What's the status of this? Thanks!

Mike

[Mike Gabriel]

Hi Jesper,

Hi Mike,
There is now a new version ready for review. I have
remade the repo from scratch in order to get a
proper dep14 structure and correct upstream git
history so please re-clone before you check it.
All your review comments should have been addressed
including adding you and Martin as uploaders.
I hope everything is in order for an upload now. I've
already released and tagged 3.34.0-1. Would be great
to get it uploaded to the NEW queue asap. We can make
further minor improvements while waiting for the
processing.
The repo can now be moved to the debian group.
Should be possible just by clicking fork and
selecting the debian namespace. Please add me
as a member on the new repo.
Best regards
Jesper Derander

I'll take a look now. If it is ok for uploading then I will push all
branches of your repo to salsa.debian.org/debian/gnome-firmware.
Forking in GitLab is a bit tricky, as GitLab keeps track of the
forking history. Thus, we don't want debian/gnome-firmware to be
forked from your repo, I rather prefer it to being the "first" repo on
Salsa, that is the "origin" of all gnome-firmware...

;-)

Reviewing now...
Mike

[Mike Gabriel]

Control: tags -1 pending

Hi Jesper, hi Martin,

Hi Mike,
There is now a new version ready for review. I have
remade the repo from scratch in order to get a
proper dep14 structure and correct upstream git
history so please re-clone before you check it.
All your review comments should have been addressed
including adding you and Martin as uploaders.
I hope everything is in order for an upload now. I've
already released and tagged 3.34.0-1. Would be great
to get it uploaded to the NEW queue asap. We can make
further minor improvements while waiting for the
processing.
The repo can now be moved to the debian group.
Should be possible just by clicking fork and
selecting the debian namespace. Please add me
as a member on the new repo.

I just uploaded gnome-firmware to Debian NEW, created the official Git
repo under [1] and also pushed some more follow-up commits.

Jesper, please note that I removed the release tag again. The ftp
masters have the last word no NEW package uploads and it makes no
sense tagging a release, if the package has not yet landed in
unstable. Also, your tag pointed to a debian/changelog that still had
'UNRELEASED' at its very top (instead of 'unstable').

Thus, let's wait for the ftpmasters to ACK the upload and then add the
tag pointing to commit 0df7877f1fe452bb6cc23f824142e28b091fd6b7 [2].

Greets + Thanks!
Mike

[1] https://salsa.debian.org/debian/gnome-firmware/
[2]
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/gnome-firmware/commit/0df7877f1fe452bb6cc23f824142e28b091fd6b7

[Mike Gabriel]

Hi Jesper,

Hi Mike,

Post by Mike Gabriel
Control: tags -1 pending
Hi Jesper, hi Martin,

Hi Mike,
There is now a new version ready for review. I have
remade the repo from scratch in order to get a
proper dep14 structure and correct upstream git
history so please re-clone before you check it.
All your review comments should have been addressed
including adding you and Martin as uploaders.
I hope everything is in order for an upload now. I've
already released and tagged 3.34.0-1. Would be great
to get it uploaded to the NEW queue asap. We can make
further minor improvements while waiting for the
processing.
The repo can now be moved to the debian group.
Should be possible just by clicking fork and
selecting the debian namespace. Please add me
as a member on the new repo.

I just uploaded gnome-firmware to Debian NEW, created the official Git
repo under [1] and also pushed some more follow-up commits.
Jesper, please note that I removed the release tag again. The ftp
masters have the last word no NEW package uploads and it makes no
sense tagging a release, if the package has not yet landed in
unstable. Also, your tag pointed to a debian/changelog that still had
'UNRELEASED' at its very top (instead of 'unstable').
Thus, let's wait for the ftpmasters to ACK the upload and then add the
tag pointing to commit 0df7877f1fe452bb6cc23f824142e28b091fd6b7 [2].
Greets + Thanks!
Mike
[1] https://salsa.debian.org/debian/gnome-firmware/
[2]
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/gnome-firmware/commit/0df7877f1fe452bb6cc23f824142e28b091fd6b7

Ok, I see no reason to remove the upstream tag though, but I guess it
doesn't matter since it points to upstream/latest.

I just had forgotten to push the initial upstream tag. That one has
been pushed now.

I noticed that the package in the NEW queue doesn't contain your changes
to the control file but perhaps that doesn't
matter.

No, I spotted those issues only after upload, but as you said: we can
dput a follow-up upload once the package has fallen out of NEW.

Also could you give me access to the debian/gnome-firmware repo?

Sure. Done. Martin Wimpress also has access to the repo now.

Thanks for sponsoring and uploading! :)

My pleasure. If you have any other packages you need a reviewer for,
please let me know (I will probably not review any kind of package,
but there is a chance, I am interested in the work you do).

Greets,
Mike

[Martin Wimpress]

Thanks for adding me to the project. I'll see to it that it gets synced to
Ubuntu once it has exited the NEW queue 🙂

Post by Mike Gabriel
Hi Jesper,

Hi Mike,

Post by Mike Gabriel
Control: tags -1 pending
Hi Jesper, hi Martin,

Hi Mike,
There is now a new version ready for review. I have
remade the repo from scratch in order to get a
proper dep14 structure and correct upstream git
history so please re-clone before you check it.
All your review comments should have been addressed
including adding you and Martin as uploaders.
I hope everything is in order for an upload now. I've
already released and tagged 3.34.0-1. Would be great
to get it uploaded to the NEW queue asap. We can make
further minor improvements while waiting for the
processing.
The repo can now be moved to the debian group.
Should be possible just by clicking fork and
selecting the debian namespace. Please add me
as a member on the new repo.

I just uploaded gnome-firmware to Debian NEW, created the official Git
repo under [1] and also pushed some more follow-up commits.
Jesper, please note that I removed the release tag again. The ftp
masters have the last word no NEW package uploads and it makes no
sense tagging a release, if the package has not yet landed in
unstable. Also, your tag pointed to a debian/changelog that still had
'UNRELEASED' at its very top (instead of 'unstable').
Thus, let's wait for the ftpmasters to ACK the upload and then add the
tag pointing to commit 0df7877f1fe452bb6cc23f824142e28b091fd6b7 [2].
Greets + Thanks!
Mike
[1] https://salsa.debian.org/debian/gnome-firmware/
[2]

https://salsa.debian.org/debian/gnome-firmware/commit/0df7877f1fe452bb6cc23f824142e28b091fd6b7

Ok, I see no reason to remove the upstream tag though, but I guess it
doesn't matter since it points to upstream/latest.

I just had forgotten to push the initial upstream tag. That one has
been pushed now.

I noticed that the package in the NEW queue doesn't contain your changes
to the control file but perhaps that doesn't
matter.

No, I spotted those issues only after upload, but as you said: we can
dput a follow-up upload once the package has fallen out of NEW.

Also could you give me access to the debian/gnome-firmware repo?

Sure. Done. Martin Wimpress also has access to the repo now.

Thanks for sponsoring and uploading! :)

My pleasure. If you have any other packages you need a reviewer for,
please let me know (I will probably not review any kind of package,
but there is a chance, I am interested in the work you do).
Greets,
Mike
--
DAS-NETZWERKTEAM
c\o Technik- und Ökologiezentrum Eckernförde
Mike Gabriel, Marienthaler str. 17, 24340 Eckernförde
mobile: [phone]
landline: [phone]
GnuPG Fingerprint: 9BFB AEE8 6C0A A5FF BF22 0782 9AF4 6B30 2577 1B31