[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RFO: crystalspace, RC buggy > 1yr w/patch, not in oldstable/stable



On Sun, 2007-05-06 at 09:00 +0200, Christian Bayle wrote:
> Bart Martens wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 12:47 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> >   
> >> crystalspace has been failing to build on alpha for > 1yr, even though a
> >> patch has been available in the BTS for 6 months today.  Previous versions
> >> of the package built fine on all architectures, making this a serious
> >> regression and preventing the package's inclusion in a stable release (or in
> >> testing).
> >>
> >> Christian, are you still interested in maintaining this package, or should
> >> it be orphaned/removed from the archive (along with crystalspace-data)?
> >>
> >> If there's a reason the package should not be orphaned, I can do an NMU for
> >> bug #358044 (and 399843) as previously suggested (by someone who apparently
> >> wasn't a DD), but if the package isn't actually being maintained I'd rather
> >> not fix these bugs just to clear the way for an unmaintained package to
> >> enter testing.
> >>     
> >
> > Hi Steve,
> >
> > If the package is orphaned, then I will consider to adopt it.  So, if
> > possible for you, no immediate removal please.
> >
> > If I adopt the package, then I intend to package a newer upstream
> > release and see how the autobuilders deal with that, before studying the
> > patches in the BTS.  This approach has saved me some time before. :)
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Bart Martens
> >
> >   
> Hi Steve, Bart
> 
> I don't think the package should be orphaned and  there is yes,  a new 
> upstream version
> that was there few time before etch, and I would prefer that alpha 
> porters make a NMU instead
> of breaking all other arch. I don't have any problem with NMU.

Steve, feel free to go ahead with that NMU.  Don't wait for me to decide
on whether I want to adopt this packge.

> 
> The package has so many dependencies that it's quite a huge task to 
> compile on all arch.
> 
> If Bart want to adopt it, change for cdbs or anything else, no problem.

I'm not sure now because Christian seems to object against the approach
I would use.  Also, Christian scared me with "huge task".

> 
> I used to commit changes to upstream and I can continue to do this.
> Keep me in Uploaders if that don't bother you.
> 
> The main problem at the moment is probably still the miss on dynamic 
> version of some lib in debian,
> and the support of Cg lib that should be  moved in non free.
> 
> Let me know, what you want to do, and I'll do my best to help.
> 
> Christian
> 
> 
> 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: