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

Bug#760123: marked as done (transition: perl 5.20.1)

Your message dated Sat, 27 Sep 2014 14:02:40 +0200
with message-id <5426A760.4000703@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#760123: release.debian.org: perl 5.20.1 'transition'
has caused the Debian Bug report #760123,
regarding transition: perl 5.20.1
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.)


-- 
760123: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=760123
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal

Hi,

We are preparing packages for 5.20.1 (soon to be released upstream, and
with fixes we'd like to include in jessie) in experimental, and would
like to check whether you're okay with an upload to unstable within the
next couple of weeks (hopefully).

There is no ABI incompatiblity, but a small number of packages need
a binNMU anyway (see [1]) and even smaller number need coordinated
sourceful uploads.

Thanks,
Dominic.

[1] <https://wiki.debian.org/PerlMaintenance>

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On 26/09/14 20:43, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 01:57:21AM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>> On 01/09/14 02:10, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
>>> Package: release.debian.org
>>> Severity: normal
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> We are preparing packages for 5.20.1 (soon to be released upstream, and
>>> with fixes we'd like to include in jessie) in experimental, and would
>>> like to check whether you're okay with an upload to unstable within the
>>> next couple of weeks (hopefully).
>>>
>>> There is no ABI incompatiblity, but a small number of packages need
>>> a binNMU anyway (see [1]) and even smaller number need coordinated
>>> sourceful uploads.
>>
>> Looks like libversion-perl needs to be removed from testing as perl-modules now
>> provides it, is that right? If so you need to file a removal bug against
>> ftp.debian.org (though I can add a hint to remove libversion-perl from testing
>> so we don't block the transition).
> 
> Hi,
> 
> A new libversion-perl has been uploaded, but I see you added the testing
> removal hint (which is fine; right now it serves no purpose whilst
> the perl package has the same version). We'd like to keep the option
> of having a separate package in testing though, if a newer release
> comes out.

Yes, I removed that one, libfile-spec-perl and libextutils-cbuilder-perl since
perl made them uninstallable. Once new versions of those are available they
should be able to migrate to testing without problems.

With that, perl migrated. So closing.

Regards,
Emilio

--- End Message ---
Reply to: