Adam C Powell IV <firstname.lastname@example.org> (26/01/2012): > On Tue, 2012-01-24 at 00:51 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > > That means one “OK-able” package, one “oops-broken-for-a-long-while” > > package, and several “unknown-status” packages. To keep everyone as > > testing candidates until this transition is ready, maybe re-uploading > > petsc 3.1 would do the trick? (Either with an epoch or with the > > 3.2-is-really-3.1-like dirty version.) This way, all packages can stay > > in testing and be updated through unstable w/o having to be entangled? > > I think we're closer than that, we've been active for the past couple of > weeks to make this happen. The only unknown at this point is feel++. > Stuff to do looks like: > * Upload a new petsc to fix some bugs (me, probably today) > * Upload a new slepc with a tiny patch to add a header file (me, > probably today) > * Upload mpich2 from alioth to fix an RC bug (me, today or > tomorrow) > * Update to deal.II 7.1.0 (me, within a week) > * Patch gmsh to work with petsc/slepc 3.2 (Christophe Trophime > with my help, probably within a week) > * Update DOLFIN (Johannes Ring, within a week) > * Test/update feel++ (?? If nobody else I'll take a stab at it) Only in unstable anyway, so it can migrate later AFAICT. > * Remove illuminator from testing (release team) dak rm seems happy with it, so it can be hinted out when the rest is ready. > * Close the RC bug against mpi-defaults (which is pointless anyway > because it transitioned just before I filed it, I'll do this > today) > > It looks like there's a clear path to success, and this can all happen > within a week or two, then we can transition a bunch of stuff at once > including HDF5. Otherwise we're stuck trying to do two transitions > which will take at least 4 weeks... This looks much better than my previous summary. :) And thanks for the details. Mraw, KiBi.
Description: Digital signature