Package: wnpp
Severity: normal
TL;DR → I need somebody to help me with Cherokee, and I intend to stop
maintaining it (i.e. orphan it) after Wheezy is released.
I have been maintaining Cherokee for quite a long time — I packaged
the initial version sitting together with the upstream author while at
a conference in Bolivia, back in 2004, and did the first upload to
Debian in 2006.
The package description is:
Cherokee is a very fast, flexible and easy to configure Web Server.
It supports the widespread technologies nowadays: FastCGI, SCGI, PHP,
CGI, TLS and SSL encrypted connections, Virtual hosts, Authentication,
on the fly encoding, Apache compatible log files, HTTP Load Balancing,
Data Base Balancing, SSI, Reverse HTTP Proxy and much more.
.
Cherokee also provides an easy to use configuration interface that
allows one to configure the server from top to bottom without having to
edit a text configuration file.
After being a very quiet package for some time, it entered a phase of
quick development, and saw eight major versions (and 82 upstream
versions in total) over five years. Right now, it seems development
speed has slowed down again.
Cherokee is not a very complex package; although it generates 16
binary packages, its build and installation logic are quite
straightforward. The package is quite a typical DH-based one.
Interaction with the upstream developers is a gift, it's one of the
swiftest packages I've seen — They are most responsive, and most
interested in having it packaged for Debian. There is an important
difference in our postures, however — A common one: They are
interested in supporting the latest versions, but not as much in
giving support to older releases. I have been requested several times
to push the latest release to backports.debian.org, but have failed to
do so.
Having the upstream project leader (Ãlvaro López) listed as a
co-maintainer, and having Leonel Núñez as an active co-maintainer as
well, why do I request an adopter for the cherokee package instead of
leaving it just for them? Because of the work focus. I cannot provide
proper support for older releases, as I am not quite literate in C and
the (very few) patches I have submitted to them end up being worse
than the bug I'm treating, and their main focus is basically providing
newer versions and prompting the users to upgrade. Leonel's work has
been quite useful, but as I have repeatedly told him, it is often
limited to a "make it compile and ship it" stance — Again, due to a
different focus.
I expect to hand this package over to a DD or DM, so no explicit
sponsoring is needed. Ãlvaro is since recently a Canonical employee —
Of course, I don't know much about his position there, but if you are
also related to Ubuntu, you might find extra points in interacting
with a co-worker.
Cherokee currently has an open security bug, but before it, since
three versions ago (1.2.100) has given several FTBFS in several
platforms (during the build tests — The binary itself builds
correctly, but might be performing in a buggy way). I have been unable
to follow up in a responsible way to the bugs.
IN SHORT, MY REQUEST:
--------------------
I am sending now this "Request For Adoption" bug. I intend to keep
maintaining Cherokee the best way I can (which as can be seen is not
too good) until the next Debian Stable release, and if no new
maintainer steps up by then, will flag it as Orphaned.
Thank you very much,
--
Gunnar Wolf • gwolf@gwolf.org • (+52-55)5623-0154 / 1451-2244
Severity: normal
TL;DR → I need somebody to help me with Cherokee, and I intend to stop
maintaining it (i.e. orphan it) after Wheezy is released.
I have been maintaining Cherokee for quite a long time — I packaged
the initial version sitting together with the upstream author while at
a conference in Bolivia, back in 2004, and did the first upload to
Debian in 2006.
The package description is:
Cherokee is a very fast, flexible and easy to configure Web Server.
It supports the widespread technologies nowadays: FastCGI, SCGI, PHP,
CGI, TLS and SSL encrypted connections, Virtual hosts, Authentication,
on the fly encoding, Apache compatible log files, HTTP Load Balancing,
Data Base Balancing, SSI, Reverse HTTP Proxy and much more.
.
Cherokee also provides an easy to use configuration interface that
allows one to configure the server from top to bottom without having to
edit a text configuration file.
After being a very quiet package for some time, it entered a phase of
quick development, and saw eight major versions (and 82 upstream
versions in total) over five years. Right now, it seems development
speed has slowed down again.
Cherokee is not a very complex package; although it generates 16
binary packages, its build and installation logic are quite
straightforward. The package is quite a typical DH-based one.
Interaction with the upstream developers is a gift, it's one of the
swiftest packages I've seen — They are most responsive, and most
interested in having it packaged for Debian. There is an important
difference in our postures, however — A common one: They are
interested in supporting the latest versions, but not as much in
giving support to older releases. I have been requested several times
to push the latest release to backports.debian.org, but have failed to
do so.
Having the upstream project leader (Ãlvaro López) listed as a
co-maintainer, and having Leonel Núñez as an active co-maintainer as
well, why do I request an adopter for the cherokee package instead of
leaving it just for them? Because of the work focus. I cannot provide
proper support for older releases, as I am not quite literate in C and
the (very few) patches I have submitted to them end up being worse
than the bug I'm treating, and their main focus is basically providing
newer versions and prompting the users to upgrade. Leonel's work has
been quite useful, but as I have repeatedly told him, it is often
limited to a "make it compile and ship it" stance — Again, due to a
different focus.
I expect to hand this package over to a DD or DM, so no explicit
sponsoring is needed. Ãlvaro is since recently a Canonical employee —
Of course, I don't know much about his position there, but if you are
also related to Ubuntu, you might find extra points in interacting
with a co-worker.
Cherokee currently has an open security bug, but before it, since
three versions ago (1.2.100) has given several FTBFS in several
platforms (during the build tests — The binary itself builds
correctly, but might be performing in a buggy way). I have been unable
to follow up in a responsible way to the bugs.
IN SHORT, MY REQUEST:
--------------------
I am sending now this "Request For Adoption" bug. I intend to keep
maintaining Cherokee the best way I can (which as can be seen is not
too good) until the next Debian Stable release, and if no new
maintainer steps up by then, will flag it as Orphaned.
Thank you very much,
--
Gunnar Wolf • gwolf@gwolf.org • (+52-55)5623-0154 / 1451-2244
Attached Files:
-
signature.asc (0.82 KB)