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

Re: Finding a tentative bullseye release date

Hi Holger,

On 10-04-2021 12:59, Holger Wansing wrote:
> Maybe the release-team could look into the pending unblock issues for d-i
> in the meantime?

Were unblock requests filed? If so, can you point me at them as I don't
know which unblock requests you're talking about? If not, they don't
appear magically on our radar, the best course of action is to file
unblock reports (with the right meta info, so please use reportbug) for
packages that need to migrate but are blocked.

> Most of them should be quite unproblematic, since they only contain translation
> updates.
> A bit more of an issue would be tasksel.
> 1. Currently there is 3.65 in sid, which needs to migrate to bullseye.

This one was missing an unblock request. I have just unblocked it.

> 2. A problem came up during freeze regarding input methods for several 
>    languages:
>    Starting with bullseye, GNOME depends on ibus, which is not fully
>    compatible with the view of some language teams, who would like to
>    prefer fcitx. 
>    The best way to get this situation fixed would require some new
>    binary packages to be added to Bullseye (would only be tasks packages,
>    so no new code/functions to be added!).
>    A thread regarding this started at
> 	https://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2021/03/msg00058.html
>    and the release-team was also added to the loop at some point.
>    Maybe release-team could look into this too, and try to make a 
>    decision?

Did you conclude in that thread what the optimal option would be from
your side? And what's the preferred option without new packages?


Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: