On Mon, 2010-09-13 at 21:21 +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 21:23:18 +0200 > Julian Taylor <email@example.com> wrote: > > > Unfortunately I was a bit too late to adopt it. > > umm, like a year. I'm sorry, I only recently decided to get more active in development of debian. Adopting a package seemed to me to be a good way to get my feet wet. I choose soci because I consider it very useful and would like to keep it in debian in some way. > > > Given that it was in squeeze up to a short while ago and it is still > > in lenny, > > (Having it in lenny hasn't anything to do with whether it should be in > squeeze.) > > > is there the possibility to get it back into squeeze if I > > adopt it? > > Is there any realistic prospect of this actually happening? soci was > orphaned for eighteen months before being removed! I would adopt it. I just need a decision if it could be reincluded in squeeze. If yes I'll take over the existing package and do whatever maintenance is required. If not I'll wait for the next upstream release and package it for wheezy. > > > Upstream is still active and is currently working on a new release > > which I intend to package in any case (obviously not for squeeze) > > Upstream has been pretending to do stuff for 2 years. There is little > prospect of a new upstream release before Squeeze is released IMHO. The > proposed upload is yet another not-yet-released-made-up-version > +random-git-noise mess. That's no better than the > not-yet-released-made-up-version-random-cvs-noise version which was > removed. > > 3.0.0 has been unreleased now for nearly three years. > > Packaging soci for Wheezy would appear to be a pipe dream. If you've > got time to do anything with soci, join upstream and get the release > out. If not, find something more useful to do please. Debian doesn't > need soci IMHO. I am working with upstream on the new release (basically a bugfix release + new build system) But it is unlikely that it will be released in time for squeeze. > > > All patches currently in the debian package have bee incorporated into > > upstream and I am willing to backport all bugfixes which have > > accumulated since the last release of the library. > > What possible justification is there for putting the package back into > Squeeze when nothing has actually changed since it was removed? > It was orphaned, now there is somebody who would adopt it. This fixes the only reason why it was removed. There were no serious bugs reported against it and the library works. It lacks a bit of documentation in certain areas, but I've seen worse. I consider this a possible justification. If it is enough is up to the release managers.
Description: This is a digitally signed message part