[02:43] <willdeberry> tsimonq2: around by chance?
[02:47] <tsimonq2> willdeberry: Yep :)
[02:49] <willdeberry> just wanted to run things by you if you don't mind. filed my first bug and added to comment on MoM: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/scim-chewing/+bug/1711263
[02:49] <willdeberry> figured when the comment in MoM says, feel free to take, could be a good one to start at :P
[02:50] <willdeberry> I resolved all the conflicts, updated the changelog. uploaded to ppa and tested installation and package management
[02:50] <willdeberry> generated the diff and created ticket
[02:52] <tsimonq2> willdeberry: Uploading several things and my connection is garbage atm, talk in like 10 mins :)
[02:54] <willdeberry> rgr
[02:54] <willdeberry> i see a couple more adjustments i can make, so that's fine
[03:10] <tsimonq2> willdeberry: "Closes:" should be "LP:" and I typically put that before the ":"
[03:11] <willdeberry> rgr, will make the adjustment
[03:11] <tsimonq2> (actually, I'd do "Merge from Debian unstable (LP: #1234567). Remaining changes:")
[03:11] <tsimonq2> willdeberry: Also, in my experience sponsors like looking at a diff from the Debian revision, not the last Ubuntu one. :)
[03:12] <tsimonq2> i.e. what you have in debian-diff.patch
[03:12] <willdeberry> docs said to include both if sponsorship was needed, but i can include just the one if you think it is better
[03:13] <tsimonq2> Yeah
[03:13] <tsimonq2> I just don't bother with the debdiff from the last Ubuntu revision
[03:13] <tsimonq2> Like I said, sponsors are OK with the diff from Debian.
[03:13] <willdeberry> sounds good to me
[03:13] <willdeberry> less work ;)
[03:13] <willdeberry> attachments have been updated and pruned
[03:13] <tsimonq2> willdeberry: Also, please carefully look at REPORT
[03:14] <tsimonq2> willdeberry: debian/patches/series.UBUNTU shouldn't stay like that
[03:14] <tsimonq2> It should just be debian/patches/series
[03:14] <willdeberry> right. i must have missed it this time around. honestly nuked my dir like 3 times getting used to the workflow
[03:15] <willdeberry> i clobbered the other one that was the same way :-/
[03:15] <willdeberry> good eye though
[03:15] <tsimonq2> Also, the diff in debian/rules can be cleaner. Instead of moving override_dh_auto_configure above override_dh_autoreconf, I'd just edit the stanza and not move it.
[03:16] <willdeberry> this control file had duplicates. so i just nuked one of them
[03:16] <willdeberry> probably why the diff is looking the way it is
[03:17] <tsimonq2> An Ubuntu delta is just a modification of the Debian revision, that's why diffs from Debian really matter ;)
[03:18] <tsimonq2> And that's why I'll always look at the diff before I give it to my sponsors because if the diff can be simpler, my sponsors will point it out, it saves time :P
[03:19] <willdeberry> appreciate all the critiques for sure
[03:19] <tsimonq2> You're welcome :)
[03:21] <willdeberry> ill get used to the process and what people look for
[03:22] <tsimonq2> willdeberry: Also, since you can control it, if adding a completely new patch is part of the delta, please add DEP-3 headers: https://raphaelhertzog.com/2012/08/08/how-to-use-quilt-to-manage-patches-in-debian-packages/
[03:22] <tsimonq2> Yeah it just takes time ;)
[03:22] <tsimonq2> (btw that's my goto reference for updating patches, creating new patches, etc.  it's worth a read :) )
[03:23] <willdeberry> thanks!
[03:23] <tsimonq2> You're welcome :)
[03:24] <tsimonq2> willdeberry: BTW here's an example of a bug report I file for this sort of thing: 1708392
[03:24] <tsimonq2> bug 1708392 rather :P
[03:24] <tsimonq2> A couple things I'd like to note that over time I've found useful:
[03:25] <tsimonq2>  1) Justify the delta, as the goal is to reduce deltas. If (and when) you submit deltas to Debian, link to the bug report to let your sponsors know you've submitted the changes.
[03:25] <tsimonq2> (in that case, it's an Ubuntu delta that we need to keep and that can't be forwarded to Debian, but that's not always the case)
[03:26] <tsimonq2>  2) Specify the Debian revision you are merging from, as Debian could upload a new revision *after* you submit the bug report and *before* you get it sponsored (happened to me once or twice).
[03:27] <tsimonq2>  3) I'll typically add the artful tag and if it's a new upstream software release, the upgrade-software-version tag. Just helps with bug organization. :)
[03:28] <tsimonq2>  4) In comment #1, I follow the same format for every merge comment I do with a debdiff. "Attached is a debdiff for RELEASE applicable to DEBIAN REVISION." Makes things much easier for your sponsors.
[03:28] <tsimonq2> (also the filename, that's pretty self-explanatory)
[03:28] <tsimonq2>  5) Lastly, subscribe ~ubuntu-sponsors
[03:29] <willdeberry> well #5 is at least in the docs :P
[03:29] <tsimonq2> hehehehehehe :)
[03:29] <tsimonq2> Like I said, I've learned from my sponsors. ;)
[03:30] <willdeberry> sounds good man. it's a hell of a knowledge dump but great to have
[03:30] <tsimonq2> For sure :)
[03:32] <tsimonq2> willdeberry: Last nitpick, enable as many architectures in your PPA as possible because sometimes arm{hf,64} and ppc64el like to do "fun" things :P
[03:32] <tsimonq2> And append ~ppa1 at the end, because you never know when someone might request changes or things go FTBFS, etc.
[03:33] <tsimonq2> Learned that one the hard way.
[03:34] <tsimonq2> willdeberry: Oh, one more thing I see. When your changelog is done, run `dch -r` to update the date in the changelog, the date in your changelog entry is back from June...
[03:35] <willdeberry> will do
[03:35] <tsimonq2> Cool :)
[03:35] <willdeberry> life is so much easier when you are the maintainer of the native package lol
[03:36] <tsimonq2> In this case, I've been eyeing up that merge myself, but I always like to check the page for the package in tracker.debian.org to make sure it builds on all arches and is installable before merging to Ubuntu :)
[03:36] <tsimonq2> Hehehehe, yeah :)
[03:36] <tsimonq2> But yeah, otherwise it lgtm
[03:37] <tsimonq2> willdeberry: Once you get an updated debdiff attached, I can poke my usual sponsor for you ;) (as the sponsorship queues are getting pretty long)
[03:37] <willdeberry> ill get onto making the adjustments :D
[03:37] <tsimonq2> Ok :D
[03:38] <tsimonq2> Also, like I said before, try to justify the delta *before* my usual sponsor inevitably asks :P
[03:38] <tsimonq2> (or forward to Debian)
[03:40] <willdeberry> makes sense
[03:41] <tsimonq2> (when you forward to Debian, it's fine to just simply say "these are Ubuntu's changes" and attach the debdiff from the Debian revision)
[03:44] <willdeberry> so in that aspect of things, i still create the lp ticket and then file a ticket with debian as well?
[03:44] <tsimonq2> willdeberry: yep, sometimes you can even file a bug with Debian before merging and if they apply your changes, just force sync ;)
[03:45] <tsimonq2> Also
[03:45] <tsimonq2> This is wrong
[03:45] <tsimonq2> +scim-chewing (0.5.1-2ubuntu1) artful; urgency=low
[03:45] <tsimonq2> +
[03:45] <tsimonq2> +  [ Ubuntu Merge-o-Matic ]
[03:45] <tsimonq2> +  * Merge from Debian unstable. Remaining changes (LP: #1711263):
[03:45] <tsimonq2> Just delete "[ Ubuntu Merge-o-Matic ]" and it'll be fine
[03:46] <willdeberry> damn dch
[03:46] <tsimonq2> ikr :P
[03:49] <tsimonq2> willdeberry: Ok, sent the bug report :D
[03:50] <willdeberry> :D
[03:51] <willdeberry> you have been a great help tonight
[03:51] <willdeberry> on that good note, i am done for the night and will tread down this path again tomorrow :)
[03:53] <tsimonq2> o/
[04:35] <tsimonq2> willdeberry: Here, uploaded :D https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/scim-chewing/0.5.1-2ubuntu1