Re: Help with upgrading libflickrnet
On Sat, 22 Aug 2009 14:20:11 -0400
Varun Hiremath <email@example.com> wrote:
> Hi Mirco,
> On Sat, 22 Aug, 2009 at 07:30:10PM +0200, Mirco Bauer wrote:
> > Hi Varun,
> > On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 21:51:56 -0400
> > Varun Hiremath <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > > Hi Micro,
> > I am not that small *cough*
> I am extremely sorry about that typo.
No problem, I am used to that typo already :)
> > > Hmm.. but, won't the old 2.1.5 binary package be removed from the
> > > archive once we upload this new version, since the source package
> > > name is the same?
> > Yes, the archive admins are regularly running cleanup processes that
> > will remove binary packages that are not build by and source
> > package.
> > This is expected and still will allow a smooth upgrade path for all
> > users that have the old version installed and now can install the
> > new version without the need of waiting for a completed transition.
> > Renaming a library package introduces implicitly a transition, all
> > rdeps have to be rebuild (and updated build-deps in our case).
> Ok, in that case since all the rdeps: f-spot, dfo and gnome-do-plugins
> are under the pkg-cli-apps team, can I upload this new version to
> unstable and then update these rdeps accordingly? Should I do some
> other tests before uploading libflickrnet2.2-cil to unstable.
Theoretical you could, but I would not. It's good if you update the
other team maintained source packages but let the
"maintainer" (Uploaders) test and upload it.
> I already built dfo and f-spot with the new version and there weren't
> any problems but I'm not sure about runtime issues.
If the compile succeeds then the API is compatible which is good but
still as this is a webservice it should be tested in the individual
package too. Notify the maintainers of the changed lib so they can test
> > > Could you please point me to some policy page which
> > > explains this upgrade process for binary package name change? I
> > > couldn't find anything on Google.
> > That's a good question, I don't know any that covers the library
> > transitioning part. The simple rename case is described here though:
> > http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/pkgs.html#s5.9.3
> Thanks, I actually looked at that section, but I wasn't sure if it was
> referring to change in source package name or binary package name.
Mirco 'meebey' Bauer
PGP-Key ID: 0xEEF946C8
FOSS Developer email@example.com http://www.meebey.net/
PEAR Developer firstname.lastname@example.org http://pear.php.net/
Debian Developer email@example.com http://www.debian.org/