Hi, I just added a section on our wiki page about packages which have reverse dependencies on octave3.2* packages and are not maintained by the DOG [1]. Since at some point (and the sooner the better) we will want to remove the octave3.2* packages from sid, we need to have these reverse dependencies fixed to reflect the new naming scheme of Octave 3.6 packages. My proposal is to quickly send an email to the maintainers of these packages, with an explanation of what we are currently doing and how to adapt their packages to the change. I am willing to send such an email. In the same email, we could warn that at some date (for example in one month) we will start filing (wishlist, or maybe higher?) bugs against the packages which have not yet changed their deps. In parallel of this effort, we could also contact the release team to setup a proper transition slot. This could help speeding up the process in case some maintainers are MIA. What’s your stance on this? Best, [1] http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DebianOctaveGroup#Reverse_dependencies_on_octave3.2.2A_packages [2] http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ReleaseTeam/Transitions -- Sébastien Villemot Researcher in Economics & Debian Maintainer http://www.dynare.org/sebastien Phone: +33-1-40-77-84-04 - GPG Key: 4096R/381A7594
Attachment:
pgpI7hEJjRwbi.pgp
Description: PGP signature