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

Re: ant_1.9.10-2_source.changes ACCEPTED into unstable

On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 09:34:21AM +0000, Debian FTP Masters wrote:

> Maintainer: Debian Java Maintainers <pkg-java-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org>
> Changed-By: Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>
> Description:
>  ant        - Java based build tool like make
>  ant-doc    - Java based build tool like make - API documentation and manual
>  ant-optional - Java based build tool like make - optional libraries
> Changes:
>  ant (1.9.10-2) unstable; urgency=medium
>  .
>    * Non maintainer upload.
>    * Stop building the gcj packages.
>    * Remove Ludovic and Werner as uploaders.

Hello Matthias,

You are listed as a member of the Java Team and as an Uploader, so there
is no need for an NMU.  There is an open bug in the BTS [1] for removing
the GCJ packages that I had tagged as pending and for which I pushed
changes to the VCS over a week ago.  Your upload doesn't refer to the
bug and so perhaps you weren't aware of it.

Since you are a member of the team, will you push your changes to the
VCS and handle the merge (as they step on changes I had already pushed)?

My delay in uploading was because (a) it takes a long time to rebuild
all of the reverse dependencies of ant (about 3 days on my machine, and
that was complicated somewhat by the default-jdk change) and (b) because
the update of the default-jdk results in an empty ant-javamail.jar.  I
was still in the process of looking at (b), preferring to wait a few
days instead of uploading a package that might cause other breakages.
Also, I thought that having tagged the bug as pending would be
sufficient coordination with the rest of the team.  

In general, I think it would be helpful if the Java Team could rely on
the BTS more for coordination.  For team-maintained packages, the
uploader can check the BTS and PTS [2] for open bugs and should always
pull the latest master branch from the VCS before preparing an upload.
Furthermore, I think it would helpful for developers to claim bugs as
owners - particularly given how much is changing right now with the
JDK9 transition.  If the team doesn't like that approach or has other
suggestions, please share them.


[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=892528
[2] https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/ant 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: