Re: Cameleon packages almost done

[Jérôme Marant <jerome.marant@free.fr>]

En réponse à Sven LUTHER <luther@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr>:
 
> >   I'm pretty sure that katie would reject it because the pool is
> >   managed through a database indexed by (at least) package name.
> 
> Not package source name ?

Both I think. The madison script works with both.

> > > And what do you want to do, ask for its removal, and put it in a
> > > staging
> > > area while it is removed, and then only upload it ?
> > 
> >   Yes, that's what we planned.
> 
> But the point is that before it get even considered for inclusion in
> the
> pool, it has to pass the scrutiny of whoever edits the override file,
> at
> least that is how things worked in the past. I would do the 2 things
> at
> the same time, if they get rejected, you get an interlocutor who has
> the
> power to remove configwin.
> 
> Also doing it this way will have as result a time were there is no
> more
> configwin in the archive, which i don't believe is a good thing.
> 
> Mmm, you could also reupload configwin, with new packages name or
> something.
> 
> Maybe you could ask also someone responsible for this how you are
> supposed to best solve this problem.
> 
> > > I would upload it and ask for the removal of the old configwin,
> and
> > > let
> > > the ftp-master (or whoever is in charge of that) do they work. No
> need
> > > to muddle the water more with uploading to a staging area.
> > > 
> > > (That said, you can do all that and upload to a staging area all
> the
> > > same).
> > 
> >   I also want to ensure everything works fine before uploading:
> people
> >   will be able to test and report remaining bugs.
> 
> And we fall in the same trap the gnome2 folks are right now. But then,
> for them it was justified, since a broken gnome may not be quickly
> fixed, and can screw up many things and people. And even for gnome2, i
> don't believe it was the best solution they choose.

  Gnome 2 is not a very good example about how to properly manage
  a transition :-) And gnome 2 upstream is partialy responsible
  for this mess as well. But I'm way off topic ...

> But what are the dangers with a not perfect cameleon ? It will most
> assuredly not break anything, and if you want proper feedback, put it
> in
> unstable.

  Your are right. I'm going to ask for more information about how
  to handle the configwin transition. Then, we shall see what we
  we are going to do. But this is really a minor issue to me.

  Cheers,


--------------
Jérôme Marant <jerome.marant@free.fr>