Re: Sundials lagging behind upstream
Sébastien Villemot <sebastien@debian.org> writes:
> On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 10:16:18PM -0700, Dima Kogan wrote:
>
>> These packages are not perfect, but I think they're good-enough to push.
>> So I just pushed them to the archive. They still need to clear NEW, so
>> don't expect them to be installable TOMORROW, but soon.
>
> I have just seen that you uploaded sundials 3.1 to unstable, without
> coordinating the transition. Now this is getting untangled with the octave
> transition, and I see that sundials FTBFS on several archs. Sigh.
>
> Next time, please upload first to experimental, and at least coordinate with
> maintainers reverse dependencies.
Yes. Right. I haven't had to think about transitions in the past, and
this clearly shows why I should in the future. Sorry.
I looked at the sundials FTBFS; looks like some subset of tests is
timing out on some arches. I'll look into it. Is there anything in
particular I should do to make octave happy again in the near term?
dima
Reply to: