Re: status update?
On Wed, Apr 16, 2003 at 05:03:55PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> 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?
ocaml.tar.gz => ocaml_3.06.orig.tar.gz => apt-get source ocaml
ocaml-3.06.tar.gz => ocaml-3.06_3.06.orig.tar.gz => apt-get source ocaml-3.06
> > > 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.
And what about the weekly mails i receive inquiring about why ocaml 3.06
is not in testing ?
> > > 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?
Yes.
> > > > 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.
See above.
> > > 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.
So much work for nothing then, and there is a sarge preview snapshot
scheduled for the end of the month, in which ocaml 3.06 should have
found its natural place.
> > > 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.
Tell me when you plan to try, maybe i will lurk.
That said, even a no, we won't do it + explanation would be nice to
have.
> > > 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?
Yes, same as ocaml 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.
Same for me.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: