Bug#597788: unblock: hyperestraier/1.4.13-2
On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 23:04 +0900, Satoru KURASHIKI wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 2:57 PM, Adam D. Barratt
> <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 08:34 +0900, KURASHIKI Satoru wrote:
> >> Please unblock package hyperestraier. 1.4.13-2 basically
> >> fixes FTBFS bugs introduced in 1.4.13-1.
> >
> > That's a fairly broad definition of "basically", given this:
> >
> >> hyperestraier (1.4.13-2) unstable; urgency=low
> > [...]
> >> * libestraier-ruby-doc:
> >> new package. split ruby api documentation.
> >
> > Introducing new packages during freeze is not particularly helpful;
> > tying an RC-bug fix up with it less so still.
>
> I've recognized this, as it should be introduced in 1.4.13-1, when I
> added separate package for supporting ruby 1.9 series.
> (to avoid including duplicate documents for them)
You also forgot to mention that -2 is still in NEW right now, which
makes reviewing it somewhat difficult.
> > As 1.4.13-1 never managed to migrate to testing due to the FTBFS bugs,
> > afaics none of the bugs fixed in -2 are regressions from the version
> > currently in Squeeze; I'm debating whether we should therefore just
> > leave 1.4.9-1.4 in Squeeze.
>
> Please consider to update 1.4.13, though I know that I couldn't push it
> to testing before freeze because of my inmature packaging;
> 1.4.9 (released 2006/11) is pretty old, even though for lenny. No users
> want to use it.
The problem is that before your upload of 1.4.13-1, there hadn't been a
hyperestraier upload since 2008, and even that was an NMU; the previous
maintainer upload was in 2006. That's usually the sort of package
history which would suggest that hyperestraier doesn't belong in a
stable release in the first place, not that we should be introducing
changes on the magnitude of
180 files changed, 14488 insertions(+), 8011 deletions(-)
during a freeze. :-(
Regards,
Adam
Reply to: