* Daniel Stone wrote: > On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 09:45:29AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote: > > On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 23:11 +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > > > > > > I've been working on packaging the latest development snapshot of Mesa (6.5) > > > in order to get DRI working with the latest i810 X.Org driver in Debian. > > > > Let me elaborate on my allusions in > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=359328 on how I think > > this situation should be handled: > > > > * xf86-video-i810 in sid should be reverted to a release > > compatible with Mesa 6.4, e.g. the version released with X.Org > > 7.0. > > * The current release of xf86-video-i810/intel and Mesa 6.5 can be > > uploaded to experimental. > > * Once X.Org 7.1 is out, its version of xf86-video-i810 and Mesa > > 6.6 can go to sid. > > > > Comments? Maybe the incompatibility should also be reflected in the > > package relationships somehow? > > Is there anything stopping us from putting Mesa 6.5 and xf86-video-i810 > in now? Maybe 6.5 could temporarily stop providing the > mesa-swrast-source package (hell, the latter could come from its own > package) until such time as we get a server release that's compatible > with it. In any case, I don't see what's the problem with pushing these > release versions into *unstable* ... While I agree with Daniel in general, recent reactions to the upload of modular X.Org to unstable have made it clear that a lot of people don't expect things to be potentially broken in unstable. With that in mind, Michel's proposal seems more appropriate. It is also similar to what Marcelo initially proposed (off-list). Thierry P.S.: no need to Cc: me, I'm subscribed to both, pkg-mesa-devel and debian-x, mailing lists
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature