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

Re: xconq (was: [2002-02-22] Release Status Update)



On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 07:48:18PM +0100, Andreas Rottmann wrote:
> Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
> 
> > Hello world,
> > 
> > As promised, a bunch of packages that aren't in a fit state to be released
> > (ie, have release-critical bugs) are being removed from woody. The first
> > phase includes the following packages:
> >     
> [snip long list]
> 
> The only package I use (or rather would use if it was a recent
> version) is xconq. There was some discussion about repackaging it [1]
> and a mail from its maintainer (Peter Crystal, [2]), but no upload
> since. What is the current status, Peter? 
> 
> I really would like to have xconq 7.4.1 in woody. For that we would
> have to fix the grave bug #80576, but since that seems to be caused in
> commandline parsing (haven't looked into the source yet), it shouldn't
> be too hard to fix.

I did report a whole bunch of bugs from the BTS to upstream, and most of
them are fixed in upstream cvs. This perticular bug have a patch in the
report, isn't it ? The bug is open since 27 Dec 2000, the patch since 17 Jan
2002, and we still wait for an answer of the maintainer about this.

> If noone else steps forward, I may start to package xconq 7.4.1 from
> scratch, try to fix #80576 and look trough the other (esp. RC) bugs
> (probably #107410 is fixed by new upstream and #107313 has a patch).

I guess it's too late to package a new version of the package, sadly. Should
woody wait 3 weeks to have it entering afterward ? Or are you planning to
upload untested software to testing ? :)

I also would like to use xconq, if the packaged version would be more
recent. But I'm ok having it dropped from this release if it permits to do a
quick release, and if woody + 1 comes quickly, too (what I expect to happen,
somehow).

If you want to keep it into woody, just make an upload applying the given
patch which was reviewed by upstream...

> [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2002/debian-devel-200201/msg02044.html)
> [2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2002/debian-devel-200201/msg02482.html)

Bye, Mt.

-- 
Si les grands esprits se rencontrent, les petits esprits, eux, se cognent.



Reply to: