Your message dated Thu, 17 Nov 2011 10:35:36 +0200
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line ahven: Should not provide a "versionned" -dev package
has caused the Debian Bug report #648951,
regarding ahven: Should not provide a "versionned" -dev package
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
648951: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=648951
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Source: ahven
Version: 2.1-1
Severity: normal
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Hi,
For a reason I can't understand, ahven build a "versioned" -dev package: there
is libahven1-dev in stable; libahven2-dev in testing and libahven3-dev in
unstable, while each one is built from the same "ahven" source.
This creates conflicts problems (#646927), transition problems (as
libahven2-dev is now "out-of-date" with regards to transitions as it doesn't
exist in unstable) and forces the maintainers to go through the NEW queue for
each new upload.
Is there a good reason that I overlooked for those "versionned" -dev packages?
Cheers,
OdyX
- -- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
APT prefers stable-updates
APT policy: (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'),
(500, 'stable'), (150, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 3.1.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=fr_CH.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_CH.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
iQGcBAEBCAAGBQJOw5S1AAoJEIvPpx7KFjRVOOoMAJQ0z0jz7gQ7yQ8EDKG3TIB2
3KPGbqzCeM74jPQafcdMYp7F6eoA38JraipvQM7jvsfjhE9zcAcHsxR1jbThxste
3fymZza2mq6HNUAwqjqYNJMKKL88k1kc3Jb3r7zuGcVt0igfEZSbn0lFxdjqzR/R
JA73GVJw5P0WFql0NqXIoVXQ8kommn9rZC5SkmgfVNaewljE3ZLCaP5dcDtED2GI
4ErJJfDUGtSRUhx4aI2uVFFOBUMcGgy/5WqYTCvyyTsR6dI2GDhSbhtXkIeeecwn
izvjGqZM58J8LTMYlYSMPUvsqntq0eoHco7XVCYFDKRHVqgVbKRyvQ6Fj3dj0A5Z
NfEyvxDAbXDhynAWZg2K3ku56I4VHcf3ile/j3skEe1PUSY2JOAqzFLjQjGYh4rE
BrExr8eOWUOGApXnEFLrn6XAFZ8oI0VGKCC0aq0sYBQFfnXLNAh49h6re1ly/Z/v
EulhWXUAvNZynhYM6sUcz1Jmf2nAszJzezefzPvH/A==
=AZQw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Didier Rabout writes:
For a reason I can't understand, ahven build a "versioned" -dev
package:
there is libahven1-dev in stable; libahven2-dev in testing and
libahven3-dev
in unstable, while each one is built from the same "ahven" source.
This creates conflicts problems (#646927), transition problems (as
libahven2-dev is now "out-of-date" with regards to transitions as it
doesn't exist in unstable) and forces the maintainers to go through
the
NEW queue for each new upload.
Is there a good reason that I overlooked for those "versionned" -dev
packages?
Yes, there is. See the Debian Policy for Ada:
http://people.debian.org/~lbrenta/debian-ada-policy.html
The fact that aliversion changes require going through the NEW queue is
a necessary evil. In return, the compiler can guarantee the consistency
of executables built from sources in multiple packages (i.e. program
sources + library sources).
OTOH, uploads that do not change the aliversion are not required to
go through the NEW queue.
--
Ludovic Brenta.
--- End Message ---
