Bug#1036751: RFS: mini-httpd/1.30-4 [ITA] -- Small HTTP server
Hello again, Nicholas
ProtonMail wins this time, I shall send directly to the bug as of now.
> Since you're comfortable with git, please consider creating a Salsa
> account and continuing to maintain the package in the Debian (previously
> collab-maint) group. Here's more info on what that means:
Sure, I'm absolutely fine with that
> That's ok, and totally understandable. What I meant is that 1.30 isn't
> that old compared to Bug #437932 (14 Aug 2007), #516307 from 2009.
> Those look like they may have already been fixed upstream. Then there
> are ones like #491078 that may have been fixed in Debian and/or
> upstream, or could be fixed in the next upload to Debian.
I'll check if those are resolved, of course; I'll add a suitable systemd service to resolve "missing-systemd-service-for-init.d-script".
>
> Thank you, I hope yours was as good as mine!
>
Sure was, thank you too and have a great day/night !
Best,
Alexandru
------- Original Message -------
On Wednesday, May 31st, 2023 at 00:06, Nicholas D Steeves <sten@debian.org> wrote:
> Hello Alexandrus,
>
> It appears that your mail user agent (possibly webmail) is encrypting
> emails to me when you "reply all" to the bug; the effect is non-public.
> It may be that the only way to fix that effect is to either 1. not CC me
> (just send to the bug) 2. Make that interface forget my key, because it
> always encrypts when a key is available. 3. Maybe there's a config
> toggle that disables unconditional encryption, for use with mailing
> lists?
>
> Alexandru Mihail alexandru_mihail@protonmail.ch writes:
>
> > Hello Nicholas,
> > Of course, please quote the first email at the bug. My apologies for omitting to reply all :)
>
>
> -- Re PM follows:
>
> > Thank you a lot for taking the time to sponsor my work, it is a great pleasure and honor for me to finally contribute to Debian packages, after 11 years of daily usage :) . Sorry for the later reply, it's morning here.
>
>
> You're welcome! :) No worries with taking time to reply, and feel free
> to ping me if I take to long to reply.
>
> > > "Do you intend to continue to maintain mini-httpd at this location (Vcs location), or do you have a new one in mind?"
> >
> > Do you have any preferences/suggestions regarding this question?
> > I am comfortable with git so forking on git wouldn't be a problem. I have no remote to share so far.
>
>
> Since you're comfortable with git, please consider creating a Salsa
> account and continuing to maintain the package in the Debian (previously
> collab-maint) group. Here's more info on what that means:
>
> https://wiki.debian.org/Salsa/Doc#Collaborative_Maintenance:_.22Debian.22_group
>
> It's ok if you don't want to; however, in this case we'll need to update
> the Vcs links in the package.
>
> > > "On the topic of work, has upstream resolved any of these old bugs"
> >
> > The latest upstream release is still mini_httpd-1.30.tar.gz. ACME
> > produces quality releases in general, but their release cycle is
> > pretty lethargic as they are a small team working on many tools.
>
>
> That's ok, and totally understandable. What I meant is that 1.30 isn't
> that old compared to Bug #437932 (14 Aug 2007), #516307 from 2009.
> Those look like they may have already been fixed upstream. Then there
> are ones like #491078 that may have been fixed in Debian and/or
> upstream, or could be fixed in the next upload to Debian.
>
> > As context, I've worked professionally on patches for mini-httpd for about 9 months, adding PAM support and AAA authentication. Sadly, the license of my work is evidently proprietary. If I have the time I can try to tackle all the bugs alone, as I know everything that's happening in mini_httpd.c. I'll try mailing Jef (from ACME) to see if any fixes are in the pipeline.
>
>
> Nice, it sounds like you're the ideal maintainer for Debian's
> mini-httpd! It also sounds like you already know work to get things
> merged upstream whenever possible.
>
> > I might need a wee bit of assistance with lintian errors/Debian
> > conventions as I mainly come from RPM land. I've packaged debs before
> > for my employer, but Debian's standards and procedures are very
> > different (and that's a good thing !).
>
>
> Oh good, you're already using lintian :) Please take care to use a
> recent version like 2.116.3 or 2.115.1~bpo11+1 (bullseye backport). Run
> it with the "--info" argument to get explanations. There is currently
> one warning (W) that needs to be fixed before this package is ready to
> upload.
>
> > I'm looking forward to your input and have a great weekend !
>
>
> Thank you, I hope yours was as good as mine!
>
> Regards,
> Nicholas
Reply to: