On domingo, 17 de julio de 2016 11:13:24 A. M. ART Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote: [snip] > I acknowledge that there are a hadful of packages that use Qt5's private > headers on jessie and that those need a rebuit, I was planning to do that > once the full stack is there. [snip] > Now it seems backports are not ready for uploading bigger stacks like this, > which if it's really the case I can understand it. If so, please do *not* > heasiate and remove harfbuzz, qtchooser, qt4-x11, qt*-opensource-src and > reject qtcreator ans qbs from NEW. While I wait for, at very least, an aswer to the above from a BPO FTP master I'll add another technical question, which I would like answered also by a BPO ftp master. From a technical point of view rebuilding a stable package against a version in bpo is feasible, but I don't know if it's possible due to policy/man power to handle them/another issue. As an example, suposse we have foo_<jessie_version> in jessie. If it somehow required a rebuilt against a package in backports someone could easily prepare a backports-like upload with version foo_<jessie_version>+bpo8+1 (note the + instead of the ~) Of course, same rules applies as for any other bpo package: whoever uploads it must take reposability for it's bugs, ask for a rebuild in case the jessie version gets uploaded, etc. I don't see any technical reason why not to do this, but again, maybe there are policy/man power issues to support this. So I would like to know: would this be welcomed in bpo? Regards, Lisandro. -- Confucius say: He who play in root, eventually kill tree. Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer http://perezmeyer.com.ar/ http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.