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: