Re: ocaml 3.08.3 upload plan (we are going to sid for this).

[Sylvain LE GALL <sylvain.le-gall@polytechnique.org>]

Hello,

On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 08:28:23AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 08:15:18AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > I ask you also to quickly look at your packages, and report here any RC bug
> > that you may still have open, and what the actions for sarge are in this
> > issue.
> 
> Listing of the March 11 RC bug list include : 
> 
> Package: coq-doc (debian/main)
> Maintainer: Samuel Mimram <samuel.mimram@ens-lyon.org>
>   294865 [        ] [X] coq-doc: The documentation for coq is non-free (this
>                         issue is being solved)
> 
> Package: mldonkey-server (debian/main)
> Maintainer: Sylvain Le Gall <sylvain.le-gall@polytechnique.org>
>   279030 [        ] [X] mldonkey-server: debconf configuration is entirely
>                         ignored
> 
> None of those really matter for this plan, so should not be an issue.
> 

As promise, i can answer a little bit longer on the reason why mldonkey
is RC for now.

Well, the first point is that mldonkey doesn't have made release for more
than 4 months now. A new release ( 2.5.28.1 or 2.5.30 ) is available
since one week. The former version doesn't work very well since many p2p
network has made incompatible release of their protocol in order to make non
commercial client unable to communicate ( as usual they don't want
people not install spyware/adware and use their network ). 

Due to this perpetual evolution of protocol, i am not sure mldonkey is
well suited for being in a stable release ( i think a mldonkey package
in sarge will be useless after 4 months of existence ). So i am not
sure, i want to spend my time answering mail concerning the fact that
mldonkey doesn't work anymore... 

Last, but not least, mldonkey actual package layout "sucks" ( to quote
one user that just send me an email ). In fact, i agree on this point,
since 1 year i have try to conceil policy, usability and easy
configuration of the package.... The result is a pretty big mess. It is
not really a question about bad maintenance or bad sponsorship. I really
don't think so. It is mainly the result of too much layer of compromise
( compromis en francais ). 

I have plan concerning the future upload, i need time to apply them : 
- split mldonkey-server to extract the init script and configuration.
  This will allow user to install mldonkey-server and not run it (
  because half of the user use it only from time to time, not as a
  daemon ). The name of the new package will be mldonkey-server-daemon. The
  former debconf question concerning the fact that mldonkey should start at
  boot, will not be asked anymore ( but a variable will stay in the
  configuration file ).
- reduce the number of question asked in debconf : i will reduce the set
  of question to 3 or 4 and only for options concerning things that is
  needed to create a base download.ini. It is mandatory, since without
  initial download.ini the things is totally unsecure. I will integrate 
  a sane configuration for the file /etc/default/mldonkey.
- ask for the create of a user mldonkey or p2p or debian-mldonkey.

For now, i am finishing a library ( ocaml-gettext ). Since i have nearly
finish my work on this, i will end it before working again on mldonkey (
i think that it should be ok by the end of the WE ).

Anyway, the package is no more in sarge, so the bug is tagged "sarge
ignore". That should be no problem concerning the migration of ocaml
3.08.3 in sarge.

Kind regard
Sylvain Le Gall