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

Re: Nexuiz 2.5.2-7

9/27/13 7:12 PM, Simon McVittie пишет:
> (cc'ing the bug)
> On 27/09/13 15:05, Anton Balashov wrote:
>> What about versions? If there will be nexuiz-data_2.5.2-7, must
>> there be rest of nexuiz packages 2.5.2-7 or 2.5.2-6 for rest of
>> packages is OK?
> All binary packages built from the same source package (e.g.
> nexuiz-data, nexuiz-music and nexuiz-textures built from
> src:nexuiz-data) must[1] have the same version. When a Debian
> maintainer uploads a release, what they upload is an entire source
> package.
> Binary packages built from different source packages (e.g.
> nexuiz-music built from src:nexuiz-data and nexuiz built from
> src:nexuiz) do not need to share a version number. nexuiz and
> nexuiz-data don't.
>> What step should I do next for release?
> If you consider src:nexuiz-data to be ready for upload, a Debian
> Developer with upload rights needs to check it over, and if they
> approve, do the actual upload. This means uploading > 750M of data,
> which is probably why nobody is particularly enthusiastic about doing
> it :-)
> In principle, recompressing large binary packages is great, but in
> practice, it isn't necessarily worth doing the upload just for that,
> unless/until there is some other reason to do it. nexuiz-data 2.5.2-6
> (> 850M) is in stable, so it will stay in the archive regardless; so
> when someone uploads a recompressed version, it will take > 750M
> *more* archive space. Similarly, existing Nexuiz users (if they don't
> put the package on hold) will download 750M of new data, in order for
> new Nexuiz users to be able to download 75M less.
> I'm not convinced that's worth it, for data for a game that is no
> longer developed upstream (some of its upstream developers started a
> new proprietary game under the Nexuiz name, and the rest forked it and
> called the actively-developed fork Xonotic). If you're interested in
> the Nexuiz codebase, IMO a better thing to do would be to help David
> Bate package Xonotic (<http://bugs.debian.org/646377>).
> If there is some other bug in nexuiz-data that justifies an upload
> *anyway*, then my reasons not to do it no longer apply, and your
> changes should be included in that upload.
> Regards,
>     S
> [1] well, that's not 100% true: the real situation is that each of
> their version numbers must increase with each upload, but they can be
> different. But don't do that.

Hi, Simon.
Thank you for detailed response! I agree, this reason is not enough for
upload the new version.
I wish know that earlier :) Anyway, I got some experience..
About Xonotic packaging: I have week packaging skills yet and Xonotic is
a big "project". Don't know, could I be useful?.. I'll think and maybe
will ask David Bate.

Thanks you.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: