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

Re: Gnome 2.6 in unstable should be ok now ...

On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 01:01:01PM +0200, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> After a week of hard work we have made a lot of progress, so I hope this
> time it'll be ok for release time :

Curses. So much for the easy answers.

> * Architectures :
> We have full builds on these 10 architectures :
> - alpha
> - arm
> - hppa
> - i386
> - ia64
> - mips
> - mipsel
> - powerpc
> - sparc  (on http://people.debian.org/~phython/)

Well done. Please make sure they're uploaded to experimental though.

> The m68k build is in progress (gtk+2.0 and a part of gnome2.6 have been
> built).

Cool. You probably should wait 'til you can say "the base of gnome2.6
has been built", but that sounds fine.

> The only architecture missing is s390. I've mailed
> debian-s390@lists.debian.org to ask for help but no reply at all (nobody
> to make builds, no access offer to a s390 box).

Yeah. I was expecting that. :(

> * Unstable package with gtk+2.4
> Not sure of the best option here. I think we should upload gtk+2.4, bump
> the severity of these bugs to serious and wait a week or so before
> NMUing them if necessary.

Make sure all the maintainers are aware of what's going on (now),
then NMU them as soon as possible (after gtk+2.4 gets into unstable,
some autobuilding starts, and you're sure there isn't some new set of
chaos that we didn't catch in advance).

> * gnutls 7->10 transition
> The transition has been made in experimental for cups, gnome and related
> packages.

Hrm; is this going to screw up d-i?

> * tests
> Some upgrade tests from "gnome 2.4.1 sarge" to "gnome 2.6 experimental"
> have been successfully made. Upgrades from unstable to experimental have
> been tested too with success.

Some woody -> experimental tests would've been a good idea; but I don't
think they're worth stressing over right now.

> Is there anything else expected from the release team for Gnome2.6
> before the upload to unstable or are we ok now ? 

I can't think of anything. Jeff? Colin? Steve? Joey? Any obvious reasons
left why the Gnome 2.6 debs are definitely not ready for consumption yet?


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
Don't assume I speak for anyone but myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

``Like the ski resort of girls looking for husbands and husbands looking
  for girls, the situation is not as symmetrical as it might seem.''

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: