Re: Conflict between R 4.5 and some (mostly r-bioc 3.20) R packages
Hi Dirk and Rebacca,
first thank you so much Rebecca. I would not have been able to manage the R
4.5 transition in the context of the soft freeze as efficiently as you are
doing now. It is considerable work and you deserve a lot of respect for that.
Also, to avoid misunderstanding, I want to state that releasing Trixie with R
4.5 was never part of my plans, given that the release calendar clearly
disallowed us to update Bioconductor packages to their latest version after
April 15, which was very unfortunately between the R 4.5 and Bioc 3.21
releases. Also it was my understanding that "transition freeze" from March 15
implied that R 4.5 would be uploaded to experimental, but I admit that things
would have been easier if I had written it clearly one or two monthes ahead to
double-check that we are on the same page.
I hope that Rebecca's uploads will allow the packages to migrate. But if it
does not, in my point of view, it is not a problem other than making other
migrations more complicated. Trixie will be new a couple of monthes, and then
be old. I do not expect most Trixie users to be seriously impaired in their
work if they have only R 4.4.
And as Dirk wrote already, there are external archives providing more
up-to-date r-cran-* packages for those who need them. What is actualy at a
stake is the non-R packages that have a dependency on a r-cran package. If we
do not manage to solve the transition problem, we may lose them all from
Trixie.
Turning off some autopkgtests totally instead of adding patches is totally fine
with me at that point.
I am still on business trip in Korea with very little time to contribute but
I hope to have 1 h / day from Thursday onwards.
Have a nice day,
Charles
--
Charles Plessy Nagahama, Yomitan, Okinawa, Japan
Debian Med packaging team http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med
Tooting from home https://framapiaf.org/@charles_plessy
- You do not have my permission to use this email to train an AI -
Reply to: