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

Bug#1023495: transition: ruby3.1



On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 05:35:18PM +0100, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> Hi Antonio
> 
> On 2022-11-23 13:13:37 -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 11:00:57PM +0100, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> > > On 2022-11-22 21:53:31 +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
> > > > Hi Lucas,
> > > > 
> > > > On 22-11-2022 17:03, Lucas Kanashiro wrote:
> > > > > After discussing with Antonio, since our deadline to finish the
> > > > > transition is approaching, we decided to already enable ruby3.1 as the
> > > > > default and remove ruby3.0 in a single step.
> > > > 
> > > > I may be remembering wrong (it's a bit late), but isn't the change of the
> > > > default a forward rebuild, while removal is a backward rebuild (I mean in
> > > > the dependency tree)? If that's true, I think doing it in two steps is
> > > > easier to manage, as packages can then migrate on their own and don't need a
> > > > lock step migration.
> > > 
> > > That's correct. I'd prefer to handle this with two trackers.
> > 
> > Fair enough. I will update ruby-defaults accordingly. Is it OK for us to
> > start the transition in unstable?
> 
> I'd like protobuf to migrate first which is currently doing its own
> transition. Afer that, we can go ahead with the switch to 3.1 as
> default.

protobuf migrate a few days ago, so I just uploaded ruby-defaults.
Please binNMU these packages:

epic5
graphviz
ignition-math
kamailio
klayout
kross-interpreters
libprelude
marisa
ngraph-gtk
notmuch
obexftp
redland-bindings
subtle
subversion
vim-command-t
weechat
xapian-bindings

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: