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

Re: Dummy package hunt (finished, for now)

On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 11:22:02AM +0200, Mohammed Adnène Trojette wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 09, 2005, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> > All in all, I've reviewed 153 binary packages [1] and I've submitted 57 bugs
> What is the criteria for the severity you set? According to the thread
> on debian-devel[1], Joerg Jaspert suggested[2] normal severity and
> a direct bug to ftp.debian.org Cced to the maintainer if the source
> package is empty. Santiago Villa suggested[3] wishlist severity.
> Everybody was opposed to RC.

I missed that thread, it coincided with a mail outage I had back last
month. That's why I wasn't aware of the proper wiki pages so thanks
for pointing me to it. As for my criteria:

- I've reported bugs with a serious severity (i.e. unsuitable for
  release) if they were associated with dummy packages that had not
  changed since woody (i.e. were dummy in woody, sarge, etch and sid).
  Just like I did back in my dummy package hunt before sarge was released.

- I've used wishlist for all other dummy packages (i.e. they are used
  for upgrades from woody) since maintainers can consider this a low-priority
  issue for the time being. It's a reminder for them, no more.

> Actually, it is http://adn.diwi.org/wiki/index.php/DummyPackagesList


> I updated it, and I will review it again with Clément. What still needs
> to be done is to double-check the ones with no bug submitted and to
> track the bugs submitted on ftp.debian.org in order to keep the list up
> to date.

Thanks for that, please notice that some are missing:

- kerberos4kth-services, kerberos4kth-user and kerberos4kth-x11. 
  Reported against krb4, Bug#322009

- koffice-i18n-zhcngb2312 and koffice-i18n-zhtwbig5..
  Reported against koffice-i18n, Bug#322012

- libbonobo-activation4 and libbonobo-activation-dev.
  See Bug#321828

- libpaperg and libpaperg-dev. Reported vs. libpaper, see #322048

- qvlc. Should probably be associated with #321988 or #322003 or
  #322013 (All of these might be merged, as they are related to the
  same _source_ package)

- svgalibg1 and svgalibg1-dev. Reported vs. svgalib, see #322068

- tuxracer-data and tuxracer-extras. Associated with #322069

- xlibmesa3, xlibmesa3-dbg and xlibmesa-dev. Reported vs. xfree86,
  see #322075

- xlibs-pic, xlibs-dev and xlibs-dbg. Reported vs. xorg-x11, see

- xprt and  xprt-xprintorg. Reported vs. xprint, see #322078

That leaves only a few more packages (~20) that need to be checked
and have bugs filed to complete the table. 

BTW, #322071 has been closed now.
> > libpgsql-ruby or ipython (amongst others). This the problem of
> > not having a standard description for dummy/transitional packages,
>                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> A debtag ? ;)

There is a debtag already and, again, it is not properly used in all the
packages either.



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: