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

Re: MglTools packaging (Was: r8804 - trunk/packages/mgltools/pmv/trunk/debian)



On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 12:01:04PM +0100, Steffen Möller wrote:
> Your report describes problems with Debian moving.

Debian (as any other project) will always move and that's why we
organise our packages in a way to easily follow those moves.

> This will get worse
> with relying on official releases, not better.

The issues I mentioned are not directly correlated to upstream status
so this statement is wrong.

> The CVS version was
> selected because of the incompatibility of version 1.5.4 with python
> 2.5. Again: the official 1.5.4 release of the mgltools still depends on
> python 2.4. They are just shipping it in their binary distribution, so
> there is no incompatibility perceived on their end.

I'm talking about 1.5.6rc2[1] which is at a quite similar status as CVS
but would have the advantage of basing our code on some released state.
 
> Upstream is with Python 2.6 these days with their internal development.
> We have already dropped that. And we do not want to create those patches
> ourselves but help upstream with it all. Anything else than using the
> CVS I can only perceive as unfortunate. And - please do not diss the
> packaging. It is an adequate adoption for our distribution and certainly
> not "bad". Difficulties we shall resolve with upstream or remove the
> packages if the community does not find them useful.

While I absolutely do not agree with this what about the following
compromise:  We do a checkout of all tools with the same timestamp and
try to reconstruct the tarball layout of upstream releases.  This at
least would solve the "not maintainable" issue I tried to prove and
which you did not delivered any kind of disproof.

Kind regards

       Andreas.

[1] http://mgltools.scripps.edu/News/mgltools-1-5-6-release-announcement 

-- 
http://fam-tille.de


Reply to: