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

Bug#695158: marked as done (wheezy-ignore tag for RC bug #591969 in typo3-src)

Your message dated Thu, 6 Dec 2012 11:07:46 +0000
with message-id <20121206110746.GK23432@halon.org.uk>
and subject line Re: Bug#695158: Bug#591969: Bug#695158: wheezy-ignore tag for RC bug #591969 in typo3-src
has caused the Debian Bug report #695158,
regarding wheezy-ignore tag for RC bug #591969 in typo3-src
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
695158: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=695158
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: release.debian.org

Hi,

the discussion in RC bug #591969 ended with a call for a wheezy-ignore
tag. The bug was also tagged squeeze-ignore. What does the release team say?

Best,
Tobias

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
tags 591969 + wheezy-ignore
thanks

On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 03:56:11PM +0100, Christian Welzel wrote:
> Am 05.12.2012 13:07, schrieb Neil McGovern:
> 
> > Can someone explain: 1) Why there were no updates to the bug
> > between December 2010 and June 2012?
> 
> The bug could not be resolved, so i didnt see any reason to update it.
> Work was going on in the background to fix this (libjs-swfobject,
> libjs-swfupload and swftools are my packages to get this one resolved).
> Take a look into the changelog for exact dates of introduction.
> 

In general, it's a good idea to update bugs with progress, especially RC
ones. Otherwise, people may assume that nothing is being done and would
be able to 0-day NMU it.

> > 2) What action is being taken to resolve the unbuildability of the
> > AS1 SWFs?
> 
> Nothing. There is simply no open source AS1 compiler.
> 
> > 3) What action is being taken to resolve the bugs in as3compile
> > (with bugrefs?)
> 
> Nothing. as3compile simply lacks the support for some of the language
> constructs used in the code.
> 

So, it looks like this bug isn't going to get fixed :(

> > 4) How likely it is that this bug will be fixed before jessie?
> 
> I dont know. TYPO3 currently ships version 6.0, when jessi comes it
> will be surely 6.6+. 4.5 is outdated but a LTS version with support by
> upstream until 04-2014.
> TYPO3 6.0 introduced another big chunk of AS3 code (flowplayer) which
> surely cannot be build in main until flex-sdk hits the archive. I
> skipped packaging of 4.6 and 4.7 already because of not buildable flash
> files.
> 

Hrm. This doesn't quite cover the expected lifetime of Wheezy.

> > 5) Why simply not removing the package would be a better idea?
> 
> Perhaps this is the better choice, as most new TYPO3 projects will use
> 6.0 or newer. I think many of the currently running installations are
> 4.6 or 4.7, and only a minority is at 4.5 currently.
> 

It's a judgement call, but given the LTS promise from upstream, I'll add
a wheezy-ignore tag to this. I'd like to be clear that this will not be
repeated for Jessie, but hopefully 6.0 will be in the archive then and
this bug can be closed.

Neil
--

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


--- End Message ---
Reply to: