On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 06:29:00AM +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote: > ma, 2006-01-02 kello 22:16 -0500, Benjamin Mesing kirjoitti: > > But for example I can speak for my package (packagesearch) which broke, > > when xterm changed how it handles command line arguments. Of course I > > didn't knew this before, so my package depended on "xterm" (instead of > > xterm<=x.y.z). After xterm was changed, it could propagate to testing, > > breaking my package. > That was a case where dependencies were insufficiently correct. In particular, if you're breaking other packages you should generally add versioned Conflicts: on them as a courtesy, or preferably not do it in the first place. > > However due to the QT library transition my package > > which I fixed in unstable at once has not entered testing yet... packagesearch | 2.0.4 | testing | source, alpha, ... packagesearch | 2.0.4 | unstable | source, alpha, ... I can't see any mention of xterm in packagesearch's changelog, nor any bugs filed about the problem, either. > Propagation of packages into testing sometimes does sometimes take a > long time, precisely because testing has been designed to avoid random > breakage when packages are updated. Working on getting the Qt library > transition over as quickly as possible is probably the best way to > shorten the delay in this particular instance. If there's an important fix that's being delayed, contacting the release team, and possibly uploading a backport to testing-proposed-updates are other means to shorten the delay. Cheers, aj
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature