Bug#1101376: ITP: package-assembler -- CLI tool to create necessary files for a Debian package

[Luka Kubat]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Luka Kubat <***@gmail.com>
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-***@lists.debian.org, ***@gmail.com

* Package name : package-assembler
Version : 1.0.0
Upstream Contact: Luka Kubat <***@gmail.com>
* URL : https://github.com/Crypticverse/package-assembler
* License : GPL-3
Programming Lang: Python
Description : CLI tool to create necessary files for a Debian package

The CLI tool simplifies the creation and modification of necessary metadata files
for building and creating Debian packages. Based on user input, it can generate the control,
changelog, and other needed files. There are a few options when running this tool: Create
a new package, or add a new changelog entry using dch.

[Alexandre Detiste]

Please stop this series of troll packages.

---

package_name = subprocess.run("cat debian/control | grep Source | awk
'{{print $2}}'", shell=True, check=True, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, text=True)

Post by Luka Kubat
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name : package-assembler
Version : 1.0.0
* URL : https://github.com/Crypticverse/package-assembler
* License : GPL-3
Programming Lang: Python
Description : CLI tool to create necessary files for a Debian package
The CLI tool simplifies the creation and modification of necessary metadata files
for building and creating Debian packages. Based on user input, it can
generate the control,
changelog, and other needed files. There are a few options when running this tool: Create
a new package, or add a new changelog entry using dch.

[Jonathan Dowland]

Post by Alexandre Detiste
Please stop this series of troll packages.

I think characterising this as trolling is unfair. Clearly this is not
suitable for inclusion in Debian, but, what isn't clear is Luka's
intent. It looks to me that they are making a genuine if perhaps
misguided attempt to make a positive contribution.

Engaging with Luka positively, to guide them towards being able to
contribute to the project, would be the better way to go, IMHO.

[Simon Josefsson]

Post by Jonathan Dowland

Post by Alexandre Detiste
Please stop this series of troll packages.

I think characterising this as trolling is unfair.

+1

Post by Jonathan Dowland
Clearly this is not suitable for inclusion in Debian, but, what isn't
clear is Luka's intent. It looks to me that they are making a genuine
if perhaps misguided attempt to make a positive contribution.
Engaging with Luka positively, to guide them towards being able to
contribute to the project, would be the better way to go, IMHO.

To me this looks like it can be a useful package, if it isn't already,
and it looks fine for inclusion into Debian.

I've found the 'dh-make-golang make' tool incredibly useful to quickly
get a suitable debian/* template for a project. I would find a similar
tool that isn't Go-specific which would could an upstream tarball and/or
a URL to a homepage and attempt to create a debian/* template a missing
tool to faciliate Debian package creation.

/Simon

[Jonathan Dowland]

Post by Simon Josefsson
To me this looks like it can be a useful package, if it isn't already,
and it looks fine for inclusion into Debian.

Apologies to Luka, I should not describe it as "clearly not suitable".

[CrypticVerse]

Hello,
I am sorry if this was said earlier and I did not catch it,
but I cannot find the reasoning behind the closure of this ITP.
Can someone tell me just a bit more about that?
Again, I am sorry if this was already mentioned

Thanks!
---
Luka

[Simon Josefsson]

Post by Simon Josefsson
I've found the 'dh-make-golang make' tool incredibly useful to quickly
get a suitable debian/* template for a project. I would find a similar
tool that isn't Go-specific which would could an upstream tarball and/or
a URL to a homepage and attempt to create a debian/* template a missing
tool to faciliate Debian package creation.

https://wiki.debian.org/AutomaticPackagingTools

The only language-agnostic on that list is 'dh-make' and while I haven't
spent a lot of time with it, my (old) impression of it was that it the
resulting templates it creates was more complicated to fill out than to
start from scratch, or copying debian/* from some similar existing
package. So I think there is room for improvement in this area.

Luka, did you try 'dh-make'? What are the main differences to your
package?

FWIW, I don't think there is any problem to have more than one tool that
adress a similar problem.

/Simon

[CrypticVerse]

Hi,
Yes, I have looked into the 'dh-make' tool. From what I've seen, it
generated too many files that were not needed to compile the program.
'dh-make', for me, also left a lot of fields that needed to be manually
edited later on. My tool takes in user input a bit more than 'dh-make', so
it can write those fields that normally would have to be manually edited.

---
Luka