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

Bug#670902: marked as done (transition: hsqldb 2.2)

Your message dated Fri, 21 Jun 2013 00:10:08 +0200
with message-id <20130620221008.GI5738@betterave.cristau.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#670902: transition: hsqldb
has caused the Debian Bug report #670902,
regarding transition: hsqldb 2.2
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.)


-- 
670902: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=670902
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition

Hi,

Right now he have the following situation ragarding hsqldb in Debian
 - "hsqldb" is 1.8.x, long obsolete version but still needed by LO
 - hsqldb2.0 in experimental (RM bug #670885 filed, should be removed in
   favour of hsqldb2.2)
 - hsqldb2.2 in experimental (well, at the time of this writing in NEW)
   which is upstreams supported version.

I'd like to switch that and make hsqldb make build the current one
and build a libhsqldb1.8-java out of a hsqldb1.8.

In February, I already asked all maintainers of hsqldb-using packages
whether they would be OK[1], so so far, regardless of two pings ([2],[3])
noone except Andreas Tille for debian-med answered that it would be OK for
him and breakages could be fixed quickly.

LO will obviously need a source upload to update its (build)-dependends
but otherwise the other packages don't need changes. Unfortunately
the new libhsqldb-java must conflict against libreoffice-base because
of the file format issue...

Dear RT, can I go on with this transition?

Regards,

Rene

P.S: Note that a hsqldb upload to sid where it's being 2.2.8 will
result in it being orphaned in the same upload; as noone wants to take
it over and I only care about 1.8.x (for LO)

[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-openoffice/2012/02/msg00069.html
[2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-openoffice/2012/04/msg00227.html
[3] http://lists.debian.org/debian-openoffice/2012/04/msg00408.html

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 6.0.4
  APT prefers stable-updates
  APT policy: (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'stable')
Architecture: armel (armv5tel)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-kirkwood
Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Mon, May  6, 2013 at 23:03:03 +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:

> So in the end it's not exactly a real or big transition anyway (except mabe
> the switch to libhsqldb1.8.0-java) and I should have done this far earlier, yes...
> 
If there's nothing the release team needs to do with this then let's
close this bug.

Cheers,
Julien

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


--- End Message ---
Reply to: