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

Re: Bug#725311: pu: Getting Debian Edu 7.1+edu0 into the Upcoming stable point release (7.2)

On Sat, 2013-10-05 at 12:22 +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Samstag, 5. Oktober 2013, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > > Which brings me back to my initial question whether we should reupload
> > > these packages to wheezy(-proposed updates) with ~deb7u1 added to the
> > > version number?
> > I was going to say "go ahead with the packages we didn't have queries
> > on" but I've just noticed in the -edu changelog that it adds a
> > dependency on the new package from -config. :(
> right.
> Besides that this is something not done before, are there any (known) 
> technical reasons against it? I really can't see any, especially as new kernel 
> or xulrunner packages do introduce new source+binary packages..

It's basically in the "new packages really don't count as minimal
changes" column, so it just depends how far we want to stretch the -edu

(The kernel and xulrunner do periodically introduce new binary packages
indeed - although xulrunner's only /just/ done so for the first time
iirc -  but I don't think either of them's ever involved a new source
package. There has been one new source introduced in to stable (via
-security) that I can think of, which was openssh-blacklist).
> > I realise it's not entirely the answer you were looking for, but I'd be
> > happy for you to upload -artwork, -doc, -install and sitesummary
> > already.
> ok, cool! Will do so.


> Just another question: ~deb7u1 will cause the version number to be lower than 
> in sid and jessie, but also lower than what we have in Edu Wheezy currently. 
> OTOH, +deb7u1 will cause the version to be higher than in sid+jessie.
>   Do you have any idea how to solve that, short of doing dummy uploads to sid 
> too? I tend to lean on using ~deb7u1 and ignore the Edu archives 
> "perspective"...

I don't have any great ideas on how to solve that one, I'm afraid.



Reply to: