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

Re: haskell-debian vs. newest HaXml



Hi,

Am Montag, den 14.09.2009, 21:11 +1000 schrieb Erik de Castro Lopo:
> > Am Freitag, den 11.09.2009, 15:05 +0100 schrieb Iain Lane:
> > > So I would recommend that we roll back until the new series is  
> > > declared stable and rdepends start migrating to the new API. I also  
> > > hope that upstream can make this situation more manifest on their  
> > > hackage page - having `cabal install haxml' install an unstable  
> > > version is surely an undesirable situation.
> > 
> > so would everyone be happy with this solution? Then we can do an
> > haxml-1.13 upload with bumped epoch and leave it like this for now.
> 
> I'll do an haxml 1.13 a bumped epoch version over the next couple
> of days.
> 
> However, I have no idea how I should handle this in Darcs. The obvious
> way is just commit 1.13 changes over the top of 1.19 (which is tagged
> as 1.19) so that when it comes to go back to 1.19 we can just grab
> the tag and tweak a little.
> 
> Any other suggestions that may fit this problem better?

Should be fine. I guess most of your modifications in the last upload
are independent of the upstream version anyways.

Greetings,
Joachim

-- 
Joachim "nomeata" Breitner
Debian Developer
  nomeata@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C
  JID: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil


Reply to: