On 26.01.2014 22:30, Adrian Bunk wrote: > Package: apache2-bin > Version: 2.4.6-3 > Severity: serious > > First, I was surprised to see the many open and non-RC bugs in [1], > shouldn't packages that e.g. use /etc/apache2/conf.d/ have an RC bug > since they'll definitely have to get fixed for jessie? Yes. However, the problem is, that a lot of web apps are not all technically release critical broken. We need to look at all of them on a case by case basis and decide what exactly they do (or don't do). This is on my to do, but if someone beats me on it, I won't complain. :-) > Second, for supporting all possible upgrade and partial upgrade > scenarios (not only between wheezy and jessie, Debian-derived > distributions like Ubuntu might have different collections of > packages), apache2-bin needs to have a versioned Breaks: against > the broken versions of all of the packages in [1] and [2]. Why? Packages in [2] aren't supposed to depend on apache2.2-bin (with some few exceptions, against which ones we /do/ have Breaks in place). Module packages depend on apache2.2-common, where we do force removal upon upgrade, so that in turn, obsolete dependencies without proper replacement are removed, too. For web apps, it's merely a definition of "Breaks", a lot of web apps continue to work just fine, just the automated integration into Apache does not work anymore, or the example configuration needs a few fixes, whereas the package itself just works fine. Not that they would depend on apache2.2-bin. > (Are there more such usertags?) No, there are not. -- with kind regards, Arno Töll IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature