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

Re: Untransitioned Ruby Packages

Hello Scott,

Scott Kitterman escreveu isso aí:
> It looks like there are more than a few Ruby packages that aren't update for 
> the new packaging scheme and still expect Ruby 1.8 as the default.  
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=676092 is an example.  If we 
> weren't in freeze, these sorts of things would be easy enough to fix, but since 
> we are ...
> What's the plan for packages like this?  Should they be updated for the new 
> Ruby package policy and sent through New?  Should they be removed?

In general, I think untransitioned Ruby packages should be "tolerated"
for Wheezy, but not for Wheezy+1. That is, if a package that was not
transitioned and it's still worthy of being released with Wheezy has RC
bugs, then I think we should fix it without transitioning. If the
package is not useful anymore, then I think it's better to remove it.

This package in particular is so obsolete that it doesn't even have a
proper Ruby build system, does not have a standard source structure
(e.g. lib/ and friends). It also has very low popcon¹, so it should
probably be removed.

¹: not the best metric in the world, that's true, but we don't have a
   better one.

Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@debian.org>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: