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

Re: libotr 4.0.0 hasn't entered testing after 55 days



On Sat, 6 Jul 2013 17:30:49 +0200
Thibaut VARENE <varenet@debian.org> wrote:

> The two libotr2* are gone, as part of the migration. So all is left to wait
> for the 3 packages you already mentioned, and as I said, that means that
> if, for some reason, they're never updated, libotr will never migrate, i.e.
> slow pokes penalize good citizens. That seems backwards. Seriously so.

There's no penalisation here. It is part of the maintenance burden of a
library with reverse dependencies. Those reverse dependencies become
part of the workflow of the library package. Transitions in the library
must be coordinated with the reverse dependencies, otherwise those
packages become uninstallable in testing. The release team are charged
with stopping that happening - library maintainers need to help.

This is all basic to maintaining a library in Debian. It is why we have
transitions and it is the biggest part of how maintainers assist the
release team in actually getting a release delivered. If you care about
libfoo in the next release, coordinate SONAME bumps with *all* reverse
dependencies, every time - or orphan the library and let someone else
do the work.

Those who choose to maintain shared library packages bear an extra
burden - the burden of transitions is *not* optional.

If people are complaining to the library maintainer then that is
correct. It is up to the maintainer of the library to work with the
maintainer (s) of all reverse dependencies *and* the release team to
get the transition completed. Some packages may get removed but that is
still a fix for the transition - however it is done, all reverse deps
must be fixed and the library maintainer is the main point of
coordination as it was the library which caused the need for a
transition by changing the SONAME.

The other way to do this is to introduce a NEW source package and wait
for reverse dependencies to migrate to the new API individually, e.g.
libgtk2 vs libgtk3 etc.

-- 


Neil Williams
=============
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/

Attachment: pgpqxtcOYnMoF.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: