Re: Bug#1142414: ITP: resources -- a simple yet powerful monitor for your system resources and processes

On Mon, Jul 27, 2026 at 3:28=E2=80=AFPM Pieter Lenaerts <[email protected]=
> wrote:
> I relaxed the dependency on rmp-serde again to >=3D 1.3.0 since 1.3.1 is
> not available yet in any repo.

Please revert that. rmp-serde 1.3.1 was built today and will publish
to unstable within a few hours.

> I set the distribution in the changelog to experimental, but I have no up=
load
> rights. Not sure if you want to upload or want to give me upload rights o=
n this
> package already.

Debian Maintainers cannot do uploads to NEW so I'll need to do the
initial upload (probably later today).

> I was going to enable salsa-ci, but I see I can't enable it in the salsa
> project. Will you do the necessary?

The GNOME team repos are already set to debian/salsa-ci.yml by default
so a pipeline began running after you pushed debian/salsa-ci.yml

Could you make your debian/salsa-ci.yml match
https://salsa.debian.org/gnome-team/gnome-tour/-/blob/debian/latest/debian/=
salsa-ci.yml

Your syntax is an older version (that still works).

> What should we do with the sub crate process_data?
> 1) Should it be a separate package or is all fine if we build like this?
> 2) I'm also wondering if disabling the process_data tests is fine? But th=
en
>    again, if the resources tests pass, then ... I guess that's what we ne=
ed?

I don't know. Since process_data is not published to crates.io, it's
not that easy to package it separately. I don't think it's a problem
to have a subproject something like this that is not packaged
separately.

papers has subprojects too, but it uses workspaces. Maybe resources
should use a workspace which might help the debcargo
update-dependencies command work better.

Thank you,
Jeremy B=C3=ADcha