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

Re: State of the transition to the new Ruby policy



Julien Cristau escreveu isso aí:
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 00:19:39 +0200, Cédric Boutillier wrote:
> 
> > Unfortunately, many packages not maintained by the team still follow the
> > now obsolete policy used for Squeeze. It is vital that the transition
> > finishes before the release of Wheezy, in order to ensure coherence in
> > the installation and use of the Ruby libraries and applications in the
> > stable release. In order to talk the maintainers of these packages into
> > converting them to the new policy, we want to send an email to
> > debian-devel-announce@l.d.o with the content below.
> 
> What does that mean?  What breaks if not all packages are converted?

Nothing breaks, but we end up with packages following two different
standards for package naming and install locations (among other
differences).

> > However, in case the transition is not completely finished for the
> > freeze, could you suggest ways in which the team can act? Is it
> > conceivable to add the end of the Ruby transition as a release goal?
> > Would it be OK to consider Ruby packages that have not transitioned as
> > NMU-able in order to make them comply to the new policy? On the other
> > hand, transitioning a packaging is quite invasive (e.g. most of the time it
> > includes renaming both source and binary packages), so perhaps you may
> > have other suggestions.
> > 
> I can't imagine why renaming source packages would be required.

It's not strictly required, but since the new standard uses a new naming
scheme, we are renaming packages as they are converted. Most packages
are already in the new standard, so it would be nice to make the others
comply.

> Are bugs filed for these changes?  With patches?

We have been filling bugs as we reach dependencies of converted
packages, but we did not do a mass bug filing yet. Do you suggest we do
that?

-- 
Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@debian.org>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: