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

Re: Bug#760884: RFS: astroquery/0.2.1-1 [ITP]



On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 08:36:42PM +0200, Vincent Prat wrote:
> Hi,
> >wrar@belkar ~/tmp/astroquery-0.2.1 $ uscan --verbose --report
> >-- Scanning for watchfiles in .
> >-- Found watchfile in ./debian
> >-- In debian/watch, processing watchfile line:
> >    opts=filenamemangle=s/.+\/v?(\d\S*)\.tar\.gz/astroquery-$1\.tar\.gz/,uversionmangle=s/(\d)[_\.\-\+]?((RC|rc|pre|dev|beta|alpha)\d*)$/$1~$2/   https://github.com/astropy/astroquery/tags .*/v?(\d\S*)\.tar\.gz
> >-- Found the following matching hrefs:
> >      /astropy/astroquery/archive/v0.2.2.tar.gz (0.2.2)
> >      /astropy/astroquery/archive/v0.2.1.tar.gz (0.2.1)
> >      /astropy/astroquery/archive/v0.2.tar.gz (0.2)
> >      /astropy/astroquery/archive/v0.4.tar.gz (0.4)
> >      /astropy/astroquery/archive/v0.2-rc2.tar.gz (0.2~rc2)
> >      /astropy/astroquery/archive/v0.2-rc.tar.gz (0.2~rc)
> >      /astropy/astroquery/archive/v0.1.tar.gz (0.1)
> >Newest version on remote site is 0.4, local version is 0.2.1
> >  => Newer version available from
> >     https://github.com/astropy/astroquery/archive/v0.4.tar.gz
> >-- Scan finished
> This is probably an error, since 0.4 is older than 0.2.2. And on Pypi, which
> is now used as canonical source, there is no 0.4 version.
Yes, looks like upstream broke their git repo. That tag and commits in it
are not a part of any branch and the version is probably related to the
version of -helpers. Unfortunately in DVCS there is no way to remove
things you've published, even if they know about the problem.

> >Well, I cannot (at least easily) build packages depending on packages in NEW
> >(or on any packages not in the archive, for that matter).
> If you want, you can build astropy-helpers from the git repository: http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/debian-astro/packages/python-astropy-helpers.git
That's what I meant by not easy way.

-- 
WBR, wRAR

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: