Re: Status of python-escript repo in salsa
El 12/12/24 a las 11:07, Alastair McKinstry escribió:
Yes, I think its best that debian/trixie is deleted.
Thanks for your quick reply. The branch debian/trixie is removed now.
Yes, they were targeted for trixie
Well, to clarify: Yes, I know they were for trixie, as they documented
the changes in release 5.6-8. What happened here is that some of the
changelog entries went to the changelog block for 5.6-6 instead.
In release 5.6-10 which I've just uploaded, I've finally restored
the changelog for 5.6-6 and put most of the misplaced entries in 5.6-8.
because I have 6.0 in my local debian/latest, which is not yet fit for
trixie but python-escript was blocking transitions.
I guess this was the result of an unwanted merge after git pull, which mixed
your current work in progress with the commits from 5.6-6 which you
had not pulled yet.
I think right now would be a very good time to rename your debian/latest
branch, at least until you decide to upload 6.0 (after all, it's not as
if git did not allow us to create as many branches as we need).
(After doing so, this would be also a good time to rebase against
debian/latest, to avoid this git conflict issue to arise again).
BTW: I know understand why you had to put the "true" at the end
of one of the lines in debian/rules. I tried removing the "true"
and after fixing the LaTeX issue, such line still failed for me.
So you had to choose the lesser of two evils, which is to temporarily
ignore policy so that the package at least builds from source.
And that's why I had to keep the true in 5.6-10 as well.
I'll report the "|| true" thing separately, as severity:important.
Thanks.
Reply to: