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

Re: JPEG 8 transition

* Bill Allombert (Bill.Allombert@math.u-bordeaux1.fr) [100214 10:19]:
> The second step would be to fix packages that Build-Depend on 'libjpeg62-dev'
> to Build-Depend on 'libjpeg-dev' instead, but that might make theirs
> build-dependencies unsatisfiable until they have been fixed. Again, please do
> not make them Build-Depend on 'libjpeg8-dev', or 'libjpeg-dev|libjpeg62-dev' or
> 'libjpeg-dev|libjpeg8-dev' or other combinaisons.  

Sorry, but that's *way* too messy. Why don't you answer the mails we
send you before sending something out to d-d-a? This single action
will delay the release of Squeeze for a couple of weeks.

I'm totally annoyed by the lack of coordination, generating
unnecessary work etc.

Can we please come to an plan how to fix that mess which doesn't
involve the upload of more than 200 source packages and ties them to
this transition? How about making (at least for the moment)
libjpeg62-dev an transition-only package to libjepg8-dev? That would
allow us to at least not block so many packages.  (We can always at
a later moment change that back - or have lintian warnings that
build-depends on libjpeg62-dev should be dropped, or have an
libjpeg62real-dev, or whatever - but now we need to get the archive
and the testing migration operational again.)

In other words, unless you object, I'm planing to make the necessary
changes. If you have another way that avoids 200+ uploads at this
moment and glueing them all together that's fine, but do that fast.
If you object otherwise, I'm going to put that to the tech ctte.


Reply to: