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

Re: Debian for desktop - gnome in usnstable/experimantal more stable than in testing ?

On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 06:29:00AM +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> ma, 2006-01-02 kello 22:16 -0500, Benjamin Mesing kirjoitti:
> > But for example I can speak for my package (packagesearch) which broke,
> > when xterm changed how it handles command line arguments. Of course I
> > didn't knew this before, so my package depended on "xterm" (instead of
> > xterm<=x.y.z). After xterm was changed, it could propagate to testing,
> > breaking my package. 
> That was a case where dependencies were insufficiently correct.

In particular, if you're breaking other packages you should generally
add versioned Conflicts: on them as a courtesy, or preferably not do it
in the first place.

> > However due to the QT library transition my package
> > which I fixed in unstable at once has not entered testing yet...

packagesearch |      2.0.4 |       testing | source, alpha, ...
packagesearch |      2.0.4 |      unstable | source, alpha, ...

I can't see any mention of xterm in packagesearch's changelog, nor any bugs
filed about the problem, either.

> Propagation of packages into testing sometimes does sometimes take a
> long time, precisely because testing has been designed to avoid random
> breakage when packages are updated. Working on getting the Qt library
> transition over as quickly as possible is probably the best way to
> shorten the delay in this particular instance.

If there's an important fix that's being delayed, contacting the release
team, and possibly uploading a backport to testing-proposed-updates are
other means to shorten the delay.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: