#1148002 RFS: luit 2.0.20260907

Package:
sponsorship-requests
Source:
sponsorship-requests
Submitter:
Date:
2026-09-28 18:01:01 UTC
Severity:
normal
#1148002#5
Date:
2026-09-15 23:08:14 UTC
From:
To:
I've updated

https://salsa.debian.org/debian/luit

for the current version of luit, and would like a sponsor.

I've also created an upload here, to check

https://mentors.debian.net/package/luit/

but am puzzled by the latter's complaint about the watch file, since uscan
reports no problems in either salsa or my local testing.
#1148002#10
Date:
2026-09-16 14:32:57 UTC
From:
To:
Neither the yellow indicator "absence of d/watch", nor "missing watchfile
standard" is a reason to worry here.

The checks on the mentors page are not yet updated to the current Debian Policy
(which would be 4.7.4.1, released on 2026-03-31).  While not a new observation
(I think there already was a request to close this gap however did not retain
the bug number) your adoption of `Version: 5` instead of `version=4` is not a
hinderance for an eventual upload to `testing`.  While preparing an update of
`ruby-mdl`, I equally noticed this a couple of days ago, too.

On the other hand, there is a green check mark next to the abbreviated commit
hash on https://salsa.debian.org/debian/luit.  Thus, the repository uses some
quality control _including_ a probe of `d/watch` called `test-uscan`.  I wonder
how this was launched in your case - because
https://salsa.debian.org/ruby-team/ruby-mdl/ includes an auxilliary file
`d/salsa-ci.yml` to ease such a CI. Here, it seems absent.  If the auxilliary
file is to be used, it is activated on salsa via Settings -> CI/CD -> General
pipelines by addition of the full address of the configuration (i.e.,
`debian/salsa-ci.yml`).  A sponsor may see this and the logs.

Side note: Inspired by other Ruby relevant packages, I use a badge `Pipeline
passed` as additional opt-in.  On GitLab, this is activated via Settings ->
General -> Badges, in a pattern of

- Name: `Pipeline status`
- Link: in pattern of `https://salsa.debian.org/<namespace>/<project>`, for
  instance https://salsa.debian.org/nbehrnd/ruby-mdl
- Badge image URL: in the pattern of
  `https://salsa.debian.org/<namespace>/<project>/badges/debian/<branch>/pipeline.svg`,
  for instance
https://salsa.debian.org/nbehrnd/ruby-uri/badges/debian/latest/pipeline.svg

The badge is gray if there is no CI to refer to, and probably red if any
individual check defined by the CI pipeline failed.  When `ruby-mdl` became a
team maintained package, the previously used namespace `nbehrnd` was substituted
by `ruby-team`.

Best regards,

Norwid Behrnd
#1148002#15
Date:
2026-09-23 07:47:46 UTC
From:
To:
perhaps.  In previous interaction on mentors I haven't found much flexibility
in responders.

fwiw,

https://salsa.debian.org/debian/luit/-/jobs/10306191

shows the result using salsa, and my local script and result agree with that.
#1148002#18
Date:
2026-09-23 07:47:46 UTC
From:
To:
perhaps.  In previous interaction on mentors I haven't found much flexibility
in responders.

fwiw,

https://salsa.debian.org/debian/luit/-/jobs/10306191

shows the result using salsa, and my local script and result agree with that.
#1148002#23
Date:
2026-09-23 20:40:41 UTC
From:
To:
Uploads to the mentors page are checked by a live version of [debexpo] which has
its own 'todos' and bug reports on [salsa].  On the public web site of the
repository, left hand pane, you find the entry `Plan` and then `Work items`.
Filed September 23, 2025 by Xiyue Deng is the the still open ticket that
mentors.debian.net does not support the current syntax 5.[1]

One plausible reason for this can be that the mentors page relies on Debian
13/trixie stable.  At time this was published, d/watch syntax 5 was not yet
adopted.  Indeed I found an announce in lines of "d/watch version 5 can be
tested" on https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2025/08/msg00143.html (by
[2025-08-14 Thu]), which is after trixie was released as stable ([2025-08-09
Sat], https://www.debian.org/News/2025/20250809)

Since this ticket still is open here, and the repository shows displays activity
(commit `2cd665e8` by Mattia Rizzolo on July 21, 2026), my interpretation is
that this ticket still is "open".  I don't know if there is an additional ticket
elsewhere because it is not "a usual package" which is listed by
https://tracker.debian.org/ - thus, a query by `reportbug`likely will fail.

Best regards,
Norwid Behrnd


[debexpo]: https://wiki.debian.org/Debexpo
[salsa]: https://salsa.debian.org/mentors.debian.net-team/debexpo
[1] https://salsa.debian.org/mentors.debian.net-team/debexpo/-/work_items/175
#1148002#26
Date:
2026-09-23 20:40:41 UTC
From:
To:
Uploads to the mentors page are checked by a live version of [debexpo] which has
its own 'todos' and bug reports on [salsa].  On the public web site of the
repository, left hand pane, you find the entry `Plan` and then `Work items`.
Filed September 23, 2025 by Xiyue Deng is the the still open ticket that
mentors.debian.net does not support the current syntax 5.[1]

One plausible reason for this can be that the mentors page relies on Debian
13/trixie stable.  At time this was published, d/watch syntax 5 was not yet
adopted.  Indeed I found an announce in lines of "d/watch version 5 can be
tested" on https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2025/08/msg00143.html (by
[2025-08-14 Thu]), which is after trixie was released as stable ([2025-08-09
Sat], https://www.debian.org/News/2025/20250809)

Since this ticket still is open here, and the repository shows displays activity
(commit `2cd665e8` by Mattia Rizzolo on July 21, 2026), my interpretation is
that this ticket still is "open".  I don't know if there is an additional ticket
elsewhere because it is not "a usual package" which is listed by
https://tracker.debian.org/ - thus, a query by `reportbug`likely will fail.

Best regards,
Norwid Behrnd


[debexpo]: https://wiki.debian.org/Debexpo
[salsa]: https://salsa.debian.org/mentors.debian.net-team/debexpo
[1] https://salsa.debian.org/mentors.debian.net-team/debexpo/-/work_items/175
#1148002#31
Date:
2026-09-24 00:56:55 UTC
From:
To:
reverting back to version 4 does appease mentors (thanks)
#1148002#34
Date:
2026-09-24 00:56:55 UTC
From:
To:
reverting back to version 4 does appease mentors (thanks)
#1148002#39
Date:
2026-09-24 07:46:07 UTC
From:
To:
however...

In last night's upload, I overlooked updating the changelog (which said
that I'd used version 5 for the watch file).  I corrected that this morning
and did another upload.  The latest upload again reports a missing watch
file.  As I recall it, mentors' warning on that (version 4) file was what
motivated me to try the version 5 file.
#1148002#42
Date:
2026-09-24 07:46:07 UTC
From:
To:
however...

In last night's upload, I overlooked updating the changelog (which said
that I'd used version 5 for the watch file).  I corrected that this morning
and did another upload.  The latest upload again reports a missing watch
file.  As I recall it, mentors' warning on that (version 4) file was what
motivated me to try the version 5 file.
#1148002#47
Date:
2026-09-24 23:24:02 UTC
From:
To:
rather than from Debian testing.  The error message goes away.

While uscan runs successfully on both systems, there are some differences
in its output (attaching a diff for stable vs testing).
#1148002#50
Date:
2026-09-24 23:24:02 UTC
From:
To:
rather than from Debian testing.  The error message goes away.

While uscan runs successfully on both systems, there are some differences
in its output (attaching a diff for stable vs testing).
#1148002#55
Date:
2026-09-28 17:57:37 UTC
From:
To:
So far, the strategy to introduce an update to (the remote branch of) `testing`
from a local instance of `stable` didn't cross my mind.  It might work here
because `d/control` defines upper, but not lower minimal versions of
dependencies.  I'm curious about the outcome, including sponsorship and thus
continue to monitor the advance on the mentors page.

Best regards,
Norwid Behrnd