On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 06:58:28PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote: > Matthias Klose wrote: > > Camm Maguire writes: > >> Greetings! Has the gf library naming proposal been accepted? > > nobody did complain, so I would say, yes. > I think so too. With the maintainers and release team accepting, it looks like we have a consensus. > > Riku, maybe announce the transition to d-d-a? Or should some more > > packages prepared in advance? > I would at least send it to all the package maintainers involved (Cc or Bcc) > and debian-devel, I'm not sure I would send it to d-d-a... Ideally I'd like to see the refblas3->lapack3->atlas3 set uploaded to experimental first. But the experimental buildd's do not pull build dependencies for experimental.. So as a lighter version, first stage: 1) announce to d-d + bcc maintainers. BCC, since it reply-all seems popular. 2) get refblas3 uploaded to experimental Since it has a anal testuite, it should expose most critical porting problems. 3) file important "please change to gfortran" bugs on the "trivial" packages. Second stage: If there is any serious problems shown by first stage, first get them fixed. Else proceed directly: Start uploading all packages build-depending on g77/libg2c. Raise RC bugs as at this point gfortran transition is a release goal. Sounds good? -- "rm -rf" only sounds scary if you don't have backups
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature