Re: want to get packages into Sqeeze
Hi Adam,
On Sat, 14.08.2010 at 18:36:33 +0100, Adam D. Barratt <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-08-09 at 00:44 +0200, Toni Mueller wrote:
> > although not fully recovered (see d-p@ for that).
> Sorry to hear that, and glad you're on the mend.
the dance isn't over yet. I'm still waiting for a proper diagnosis, but
my energy levels are way up.
> I see that this has since been uploaded. As it is a new upstream
> version I'd prefer to let it age in unstable for a while longer first;
> please ping us again in another week or so.
Ok.
> > * postfix-cluebringer (#577270):
>
> This doesn't appear to have even made it to NEW yet? On that basis I'm
> afraid we'd be unlikely to grant a freeze exception for it.
This package - it's actually a set of five packages, one virtual
package that provides the daemon, with three variants, depending on
database type, and one for the web ui that can be used to configure it
- has not yet made it into NEW. Right now, I'm haggling with properly
installing and uninstalling the package, as the guy who produced the
package imho made some packaging errors, and this doesn't work
flawlessly right now, or at least not on Testing (I'm going to check
on a Sid VM RSN). I wanted to get this right before the first upload.
Unfortunately, the guy who did the original packaging, Nikolai Lusan,
is not quite responsive atm due to his share of problems in his RL.
But this _only_ affects the packaging itself.
I've since had discussions with upstream about what to actually put
into the package, and I'm quite confident that the packaging will be
the only issue with this package.
> > * roundup:
> >
> > The latest version of this package corrects several programming
> > errors, and also one error wrt. the Xapian migration that was present
> > in the patch Olly Betts sent me weeks ago. None of these problems were
> > corrected in the latest security upload by Moritz Muehlenhaus.
>
> Again, the packaging format change here makes the diff quite a bit
> harder to follow.
You mean, the diff between the old and the new package? As I agree with
the proponents of the new packaging format that the packages themselves
are much easier to manage.
> The changes generally look ok, but I'd prefer that this also got some
> more time in unstable. Please ping us again in another week or so.
No problem.
Thank you so far!
Kind regards,
--Toni++
Reply to: