Re: Cameleon packages available
On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 01:57:20PM +0200, Georges Mariano wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Oct 2002 18:43:35 +0200
> Stefano Zacchiroli <zack@cs.unibo.it> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 06:30:41PM +0200, Georges Mariano wrote:
> > > Would it be possible to set up an entry in the BTS for
> > > "debian-ocaml-maint" where general bugs (i.e not related to a
> > > specific package) may be stored ...
> >
> > I doubt, our community is too smal, anyway ...
> Ok, but BTW, this has nothing to do with the size of the related
> community (just need to have a dummy package debian-ocaml-maint, of
> course correcting these bugs is not mandatory since there is no
> maintainer...)
>
> > > Please build the packages for woody (>stable< release) *first*
> > >
> > > and, why not, please provide one "experimental" source (if one is
> > > needed) [may be by using something like Savannah to have a common
> > > repository (or somewhere in debian.org's world)]
>
> >From my point of view, the following does not make sense
> > These are not bugs, debian practice requires that new packages are
> > uploaded to (and therefor built for) unstable,
>
> I don't understand why you say "therefor..."!? "unstable" is just a
> repository area (not a running machine AFAIK). So, of course package
> have to be uploaded there but they only have to be built for the
> client machines (e.g. mine ;-) which may be potato/woody/sarge...
>
> Well, do you mean that autobuilders are running sarge ?? (which may
> be a "good" explanation of what you said)
No, the autobuilder are running sid, naturally.
There may be special cases for the autobuilders for
stable/proposed-updates (you know the problem which delayed woody almost
3 month), but for the most common case, all packages are built with sid.
> > only when really
> > needed packages are built and uploaded to stable directly.
> This is not what I meant. In other words, to be more precise, if you
> build your package in a woody/chroot, your packages will reach
> "unstable" with the strictly neeeded dependencies (in this case,
> ocaml-ioxml will be also **correctly** built, uploaded into sarge, but
> with the dependance on ocaml-3.04 not ocaml-3.06).
No, new package built are targeted for sarge, and thus must be built on a
unstable box. There will be no addition to stable anyway, so there is no
need to build packages for it. Apart of the woody rebuilt effort Stefano
is maintaining as a voluntary work.
> Of course, If your are not interested in providing packages with the
> minimal dependencies, well, go ahead... and users have to wait sarge
> to become the new stable release.
All new packages will be built in priority for unstable and migrate into
testing/future sarge.
You can always do a apt-get -t sarge install package if you want.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: