Re: Transition to OCaml 3.11.1...
Hello,
On 12-06-2009, Stéphane Glondu <steph@glondu.net> wrote:
> David MENTRE a écrit :
>> Regarding Ubuntu, the Debian Import Freeze is set to the 25th of June.
>> After that date, packages can be synchronized upon request until the
>> 13th of August.
>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KarmicReleaseSchedule
>>
>> Currently, nearly all (i.e. except 3 packages) are on 3.11.0.
>>
>> According to your planning, it would mean that OCaml 3.11.1 would be
>> uploaded now (12th of June) and all other packages rebuilt after the
>> 23th of June. It could break the current OCaml status on Ubuntu. I
>> don't know if massive rebuild of packages (binNMU???) is possible on
>> Ubuntu.
>
> Not right now (I would like to wait for the remaining of the OCaml team,
> and the release team approvals), but certainly before the 25th of June.
> I guess there will be a lot of binNMUs (at least 50, maybe 100, out of
> 139 packages or so), and I don't know either how Ubuntu manages this
> kind of task.
>
>> Why do you think of this?
>>
>> Of course, I would very much have OCaml 3.11.1 on Karmic but that
>> might be difficult to do in such a short time frame.
>
> I think it's up to the Ubuntu release managers to decide. FYI, the last
> transition (to 3.11.0) took 1.5 months since the first upload to
> unstable, but it was a big transition: a new major version of OCaml, and
> big changes in our way to do things that caused > 100 sourceful uploads.
> The feature freeze for Karmic is set at the end of August, so 2.5 months
> from now. So it looks like there is time, but rebuilds must be handled
> efficiently (this is still an unknown to me). If you decide not to ship
> 3.11.1, care must be taken to not import ocaml 3.11.1 from sid.
>
>
I think we are too tigh regarding time. I prefer that Ubuntu ship a good
3.11.0 release than to have to fight for months to get a 3.11.1.
Moreover, we can use 3.11.1 transition to stress test dh-ocaml after we
have add some functionnalities (like automatic dependencies). This will
made us wait until, at least, Debcamp.
Regards,
Sylvain Le Gall
Reply to: