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

Re: status update?



En réponse à Sven Luther <luther@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr>:

> > Well, I like the idea of ocaml_x.xx.tar.gz being the pristine
> upstream
> > tarball, unless there is no other choice.
> 
> It is a natural thing to do. upstream already ships a
> ocaml-3.06.tar.gz
> file, so where is the problem.

It is empty in your proposal, isn't it?

> > Currently, there is no problem on the user side but only on the
> > infrastructure side. There are problems that are independent from
> > our will, RC bugs that is. Either we help fixing them, or we wait
> > for them to be fixed.
> 
> Ok, now the question is, do we continue with the mini-freeze, or do we
> abandon it.

I personaly don't have anything to update. But, yes, I think
we could postpone the mini-freeze. We are reactive enough to care
for everyone's packages in case of a problem.

> > If you think that removing those packages from woody will fix,
> 
> I have no way of being sure.
> 
> > then this is a good solution right now.
> 
> Yes, if it gets implemented.

What? Removing packages?
 
> > > BTW, what would be the apt-get source reaction if i build depended
> the
> > > ocaml package on ocaml-3.06 ?
> > 
> > I think this is not natural at all. It don't see the benefit for the
> > user. I don't see any reason on the user's side.
> 
> But would there really be a disadvantage, apart from it not being
> 'natural'.

The disadvantage of not being necessary on the user side.
 
> > But we don't have real problems with our packages. We are able to
> fix
> > our problem. Problems come from others currently.
> 
> Yes, and they expect us to work on fixing their problem to continue
> our
> work, unless we drop the mini-freeze that is.

Exactly.

> > I will try to catch some ftp-master on irc in order to get the work
> > done.
> 
> Yes, please do so, maybe you will have more luck than i.

neuro maybe be only on the night. I don't count any more on
Anthony, he's too harsh.


> > What the fix?
> 
> All these packages have to be installable in testing and all of the
> vorbis stuff will follow.

Ah, so libvorbis is blocked by them?

> It is basically the same problem as the one with ocaml right now, but
> on
> a much bigger scale. Not to speak about the postgresql bug nobody
> seems
> to care about and the maintainer trying to solve it alone and asking
> for
> help on debian-devel.

I won't judge anyone, I'm personaly unable to help.

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

http://marant.org



Reply to: