Re: galeon (not) in Debian stable
Mark Howard <mh@debian.org> writes:
> Hi,
> The Debian release manager announced recently that the time has come to
> prepare for a stable release. At present we have cvs snapshots of galeon
> in Sid. Most people agree this is not yet production quality;
> unfortnately there isn't enough time for this situation to change.
>
I strongly disagree here. My browsing needs may be below average, but
I use Galeon as my main browser (and only sometimes fire up something
else, mainly for testing browser compatibility of self-developed web
apps). I do not experience frequent crashes nor any other annoyances
that would make the package unsuitable for release with a Debian
stable.
What I agree to is that galeon as out of CVS is a regression against
1.2, feature-wise. See on below...
> Another option would be to include galeon 1.2 in Debian. This would mean
> maintaining a gtk1.2 version of mozilla; reinvestigating many (150+?)
> reports which were closed when galeon1.3 was moved into the Debian
> package; having a browser which has not been tested thoroughly with
> recently mozilla builds (everyone uses galeon1.3); and having a gnome
> browser which is very out of date and not consistent with the rest of
> the Desktop.
> I am not interested in maintaining a galeon-1.2 package and do not
> personally believe it should be done. If any other developers wish to do
> this (and, of course, mozilla-gtk1.2, mozilla-X-gtk1.2 packages), feel
> free. (would the ftpmasters allow two versions of mozilla?)
>
I also think that shipping 1.2 is probably not worth it given all the
trouble associated with it.
> My next upload of galeon will be to the experimental branch of Debian as
> per the requests of the release manager. I will then request the removal
> of galeon packages from sarge and sid. Unfortunately this will mean that
> all galeon builds will be manual until the buildd system is extended
> for experimental. I will only build i386 packages - hopefully developers
> with other platforms will build galeon on them.
>
Please don't do that. When nobody maintains 1.2 .debs, this means that
sarge will ship without any version of galeon, which is more of a
regression for users upgrading from woody to sarge (1.2.5 -> nothing)
than 1.2 -> 1.3. Users could switch to epiphany, but I'm sure not all
of them will be happy.
Of course, you're the maintainer of galeon, and most probably know
better, but I really wonder what issues make galeon 1.3
non-releasable-quality from your point of view (and the other "most
people").
Regards, Andy
--
Andreas Rottmann | Rotty@ICQ | 118634484@ICQ | a.rottmann@gmx.at
http://www.8ung.at/rotty | GnuPG Key: http://www.8ung.at/rotty/gpg.asc
Fingerprint | DFB4 4EB4 78A4 5EEE 6219 F228 F92F CFC5 01FD 5B62
Packages should build-depend on what they should build-depend.
Reply to: