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

Re: Gforge needing a hint?

On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 02:51:27PM +0100, Roland Mas wrote:

> According to http://bjorn.haxx.se/debian/testing.pl?package=gforge the
> gforge packages are not stalled by php4 any more (although it used to
> be, and php4 hasn't entered testing).  I'm told maybe there needs to
> be some tweaking and/or hinting so that the gforge packages enter
> testing, since there's no RC bug and no versioned dependencies outside
> of what's currently in testing.

>   I'd be glad it that could happen, because I've postponed the next
> upload for weeks hoping the last one was going in any minute now.

From update_output.txt.gz:

trying: gforge
skipped: gforge (9 <- 208)
    got: 201+0: a-42:a-44:h-38:i-77
    * i386: gforge, gforge-cvs, gforge-db-postgresql, gforge-dns-bind9, gforge-ftp-proftpd, gforge-ldap-openldap, gforge-lists-mailman, gforge-mta-exim, gforge-mta-postfix, gforge-shell-ldap, gforge-sourceforge-transition, gforge-web-apache

I don't know why this wasn't caught in update_excuses, but these
packages are clearly still waiting on php4 in practice, and no hinting
is sufficient to push it through.

Also according to update_output.txt.gz, perl is now ready to go into
testing, except it breaks sympa, whose version in testing doesn't depend
on perl as an alternative to libmime-base64-perl.  If sympa can be
removed from testing (it currently has another open RC bug), that would
pave the way for getting perl, apache, php4, etc. into testing.  In the
meantime, I'll look at NMUing sympa to fix the RC bug.

Given that things are still moving a little sluggishly post-restoration
(release assistants don't have access to auric and can't provide testing
hints directly), you should judge for yourself how radical a change a
new gforge upload would be and whether that's a good idea right now
given that there are still some delays ahead.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: pgpKwhxJ1GA9F.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: