Re: 185 Packages that look orphaned

[Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de>]

Thanks for your quick reply.

Emanuele Rocca <ema@debian.org> writes:

> * On 27-01-04 - 00:58, Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de> wrote: 
> >  I looked through the differences between testing and unstable and
> >  picked out everything older than 100 days. 
> [...]
> 
> >  PS: Dear debain QA group, you own a few packages in the list and at
> >  least one isn't shown as orphaned.
> [...]
> 
> >  qmail-pop3-sv qmail-qfilter qmail-svqmail-smtp-sv 
> I am working on a QA upload for qmail-qfilter.
> Actually qmail-sv, qmail-smtp-sv and qmail-pop3-sv are not orphaned.
> 
> The problem here is that all these packages depends by qmail which 
> isn't present because it's not allowed to distribute it in compiled 
> form.
> 
> What about making these packages Recommend qmail-src, perhaps giving 
> additional informations in README.Debian?
> 
> This is what I thought to do with qmail-qfilter.
> 
> Cheers,
> 	ema

Suggesting/Recommending qmail-src is a good idea.

Apart from that you have to manually request that the packages are
moved to sarge after the trial period. The testing script doesn't know
how to handle the qmail Depends.

MfG
        Goswin