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

Re: libcommoncpp2 library transition

I was going to say, "Please go ahead with this", but it seems you
already have. In fact, your message was apparently sent after the upload
to unstable, so I guess this was not a coordination message after all.

Okay, no worries, but please just be aware that a day of two of your
patience can save may hours of work to release team members in a
worst-case scenario.

So, moving forward: does this transition need binNMUs, or are you
planning on doing sourceful uploads for all of the packages involved? (I
see that eg. twinkle has a new upstream version in experimental.)

If some packages don't need sourceful uploads, please let us know and
we'll schedule binNMUs. Otherwise, please ping us when you believe all
uploads are in place and all packages have been tried to build at least
once in every architecture.


--- Mark Purcell [Mon, 16 Feb 2009 22:42:20 +1100]:

> Hi,

> Not sure exactly what info we should be providing for transitions, but here 
> goes.

> I propose a library transition for libcommoncpp2 to match a new upstream 
> soname (which has already been transitioned via experimental)

> libcommoncpp2-1.6-0  (sid)
> Reverse Depends:
>   twinkle
>   libzrtpcpp-1.3-0
>   libcommoncpp2-dev
>   libccscript3-1.1-0
>   libccrtp1-1.6-1
>   glcpu
>   clamfs
>   bayonne

> libccgnu2-1.7-0  (experimental)
> Reverse Depends:
>   libzrtpcpp-1.4-0
>   libccrtp1-1.7-0
>   twinkle
>   libzrtpcpp-1.4-0
>   libcommoncpp2-dev
>   libccrtp1-1.7-0

> The bulk of these are managed by the pkg-voip team, so shouldn't pose a major 
> problem. libcommoncpp2 is the foundation library for a number of these libs 
> which have all-ready been upgraded in experimental.

> Others have been Cc:ed

> Mark

Adeodato Simó                                     dato at net.com.org.es
Debian Developer                                  adeodato at debian.org
Que no te vendan amor sin espinas
                -- Joaquín Sabina, Noches de boda

Reply to: