RFS: gnustep-base (updated package)

[Yavor Doganov <yavor@gnu.org>]

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.20.0-1
of my package "gnustep-base".

It builds these binary packages:
gnustep-base-common - GNUstep Base library - common files
gnustep-base-doc - Documentation for the GNUstep Base Library
gnustep-base-examples - Examples using the GNUstep Base Library
gnustep-base-runtime - GNUstep Base library - daemons and tools
libgnustep-base-dev - GNUstep Base header files and development libraries
libgnustep-base1.20 - GNUstep Base library
libgnustep-base1.20-dbg - GNUstep Base library - debugging symbols

The package appears to be lintian clean and is targeted for
experimental; it would enable us (us == GNUstep team) to evaluate what
to release with squeeze.  Short summary below:

1) Current situation:
   -base 1.19.3, -gui/back 0.16.0:
   * Cons: RC buggy on multiple levels, not releasable.
   * Pros: None.

   (Note: The reason is that gnustep-base/1.19.3 was an ABI-breaking
   release (compared to 1.19.1) and it should never have been uploaded
   as it is.  It's too late to repair the damage now.)

2) Relevantly safe (but unpleasant for us/users) variant:
   -base 1.19.3, -gui/back 0.17.1 (currently in experimental):
   * Cons: Both are already obsolete.
   * Pros: Already tested among the Debian GNUstep team members (which
     is not much -- 1-3 people).

3) Hypothethcally safe variant:
   -base 1.20.0, -gui/back 0.17.1 (currently in experimental):
   * Cons:
     - Untested and not recommended by upstream combination (stable
       Base release with unstable GUI/Back release lagging one cycle).
     - -gui/0.17.1 does not build against -base/1.20.0 (no surprise);
       significant wizardry involved to make it compile, let alone
       ensure things work at runtime.
   * Pros:
     - None; all GNUstep apps depend on -base (just like all GNOME
       apps depends on GLib) so a gnustep-base transition implies
       binNMUs for all packages depending on gnustep-gui, too.

4) Best (from upstream and stable Debian users POV) variant:
   - base 1.20.0, -gui/back 0.18.0.
   * Cons:
     - Untested within Debian (at the time of writing).
     - Some parts of the libraries are essentially rewritten, which is
       somewhat a scary fact in itself (implications unknown as of now).
     - Many packages in Debian will fail to build and/or run (we'll
       try to fix them all), and will fall back to variant 2) if we
       can't manage.
   * Pros:
     - Current upstream _stable_ releases.
     - Important bugfixes are going to be applied to the stable
       branch, or in most cases will be easily backportable.
     - Whatever you can add here to justify the usefulness of having a
       (relevantly) long-time supported upstream, stable, up-to-date
       at the time of the Squeeze release, thing.


In short: We'll see, but that's what experimental is for, right?  It
is my understanding that uploading this package would not impede the
scenarios above, and we will be still able to release as per scenario
2) above.

The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
- URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gnustep-base
- Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable
- dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gnustep-base/gnustep-base_1.20.0-1.dsc

I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.