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

Bug#860404: marked as done (unblock: kicad/4.0.6+dfsg1-1 (pre-approval))

Your message dated Mon, 1 May 2017 15:18:33 +0200
with message-id <20170501131833.6xzhovbg3kwlyzao@betterave.cristau.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#860404: unblock: kicad/4.0.6+dfsg1-1 (pre-approval)
has caused the Debian Bug report #860404,
regarding unblock: kicad/4.0.6+dfsg1-1 (pre-approval)
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.)


-- 
860404: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=860404
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: unblock

Dear Release Team,

the current version of KiCad in testing is 4.0.5+dfsg1-4. KiCad is a
Electronic Design Automation tool were people can create electronic
schematics and also can create PCBs later from that.

It was shown by report #859409 that the recent version in testing
has some none working footprint settings. This makes it hard for not
well experienced user to work around that.

The reason for this misbehavior is due some restructured footprint
libraries done by upstream in preparation for the release of 4.0.5.
Upstream has mostly renamed some footprints and partially moved some
parts of footprints into other libraries. Upstream has no rule like not
renaming any footprints within one release cycle.

We can "fix" this mostly by shipping the new footprints and do
symlinking the old names to the new footprints. This is what I have done
in #859409 and the reporter of #859409 has tested some new created
modified packages.

After the freeze in January upstream also has done a new fixup release,
I prepared and melted this new release also into the packages provided
in #859409. The feedback from the reporter and my local testing of this
packages are positive and functional.

So I'd like to ask if a upload of kicad package 4.0.6+dfsg1-1 to
unstable is o.k. and if a unblock request after the 10 days is likely to
be accepted? Otherwise we can provide the current version 4.0.6 later by
backports, but I would really like to see a not broken version of KiCad
in Stretch. There are no other packages that depends on any kicad*.

Please note that I'm not the maintainer of KiCad, this is Georges
Khaznadar. Georges gave me upload rights for kicad some months ago and
I've done most of the packaging work of the last two upstream releases.
Unfortunately Georges is busy and small on time in the past due his day
job.  I haven't seen this issue from the report while preparation of
4.0.5 for unstable as I wasn't aware of all the specific of the
footprint handling at this time.

Regards
Carsten

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 9.0
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (500, 'testing')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: armhf

Kernel: Linux 4.9.0-2-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=de_DE.utf8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:20:00 +0000, Niels Thykier wrote:

> Control: tags -1 moreinfo
> 
> Carsten Schoenert:
> > Hello Niels,
> > 
> 
> Hi Carsten,
> 
> Thanks for the mail.
> 
> > On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 12:36:00PM +0000, Niels Thykier wrote: 
> >> It is probably a lot easier for us to judge this given a source debdiff
> >> of the actual changes (or two, one for the symlinks and one for the
> >> upstream release).  Could you perhaps provide such debdiff?
> > 
> > of course I can. The upstream changes are a bit to big adding them here and
> > they are not that useful I think. So I drop them here.
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > Regards
> > Carsten
> > 
> 
> 
> Ok.  This, along with the fact that files are renamed and change meaning
> (as noted in the README), worries me.  My current gut feeling is to say
> no to the upstream release for stretch.
> 
Closing this request, fixes for 4.0.5 can be discussed in separate
unblock bugs to reduce confusion.

Cheers,
Julien

--- End Message ---
Reply to: