Re: Tcl/Tk plans for Squeeze
On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 02:10:29PM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> "Francesco P. Lovergine" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > Ok, we found an agreement about a tentative plan for Tcl/Tk. I'm
> > submitting this plan to you in order to understand if there is the time
> > and will to allow this transition in squeeze.
> > At the very first stage, we will submit a tcltk-default with 8.5 in
> > *experimental* in order to allow all default dependent packages to use 8.5
> > (ideally by just binNMU).
> binNMUs won't work. As the packages are built in an unstable
> environment, they will pick up the default from unstable.
Ok, so I'm going to upload 0days/nmu to force experimental rebuilds.
That will be done possibly for other packages with versioned
dependencies. I will notify package maintainers about that.
> > The 8.4 should be then built without multi-threading, and all packages
> > currently depending on tcl/expect 8.3 should instead use 8.4 as
> > such. All that could be done in experimental and by NMUs.
> That would be good, as it doesn't interfere with other transitions and
> thus everyone can do their work without stepping on someone else's toes :-)
> > If all key packages had no problems on all archs, we could
> > consider uploading onto sid and then dropping 8.3. The staging area is
> > the only way to avoid unexpected breakages in sid ATM. Of course, we
> > could start with staging with or without RMs agreement, but the final
> > acceptance for sid will depend on freezing time and RM team decisions.
> > In the meantime we will do our home work in experimental.
> Yes, please do so. I don't see a problem to just do this transition in
> unstable after it was prepared in edxerimental.
Francesco P. Lovergine