Re: What is blocking fam from testing?
On 12 May 2003, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> From: Michel Dänzer <daenzer@debian.org>
> Subject: Re: What is blocking fam from testing?
>
> On Mon, 2003-05-12 at 10:03, Johannes Rohr wrote:
> > Hello there,
> >
> > tracking down what is blocking Gnome 2 from testing I found that fam
> > is the last package that still holds back gnome-vfs, thus libgnome and
> > everything that depends on it.
> >
> > Having visited http://packages.qa.debian.org/f/fam.html, I fail to
> > understand what is still blocking fam. The update-excuses say, fam was
> > a valid candidate and they don't indicate any further issues.
> >
> > Could someone please enlighten me, if possible?
>
> http://bjorn.haxx.se/debian/testing.pl?package=fam
Before anyone replies this is a horrible idea, I know it is :P
But why not release a version of gnome-vfs which doesn't depend on fam,
allow it to exist long enough to migrate to testing, and immediately af-
ter that replace it with a gnome-vfs which does require fam again?
You could put a debconf notice in the pre-install of the package, ex-
plaining that unstable users should put gnome-vfs on hold, and allowing
the user to quit at that point.
Again, I know this is a horrible idea, but the alternative is to wait
for fam, and the packages that depend on it, to be fixed, which may take
up to 2 or 3 months. In the meanwhile, people using testing won't be
able to use Gnome 2, we don't get many usefull bug reports (I'm not sure
which has the larger user-base; unstable or testing, I suppose testing).
I thinkl you loose either way, be it by not having gnome 2 in testing
(big loss) or by having a temporary regression that people who pay at-
tention can avoid (small loss).
I'm not sure if we do this the whole of Gnome 2 will migrate into tes-
ting, but at least the libraries so probably a lot of the apps too.
Kind regards,
Chipzz AKA
Jan Van Buggenhout
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UNIX isn't dead - It just smells funny
Chipzz@ULYSSIS.Org
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to: