Hello Jochen.
On 1/4/24 02:44, Jochen Sprickerhof wrote:
Hi Chris,
* Chris Knadle <chris.kna...@coredump.us> [2024-01-02 03:06]:
Can the poco library be updated? Can I help in some way?
poco is basically orphaned, as I dropped myself from Uploaders in git
and did not hear from the other maintainers for some time. The best
way to help is to step up as a maintainer and update it ;).
The way to orphan a package is to do an upload and setting the
maintainer to be <packa...@qa.debian.org>. Until that's done the package
ends up in maintainership limbo. See the bottom of Policy 3.3, and
Developer's Reference section 5.9.4.
https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-binary.html#the-maintainer-of-a-package
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.en.html#orphaning-a-package
https://wiki.debian.org/Orphaning
I may be able to prepare an updated version to upload as an NMU (i.e. it
would be Debian version 1.13.0-0.1), but I can't take over maintaining
this package long-term because I don't use it and am not familiar with
it -- I only maintain a package that has it as a required build
dependency. I also haven't maintained a library yet, but I've been in
this situation of needing to upload a newer version of a library before
so I might be able to figure out what's required to prepare an upload.
It would be interesting to upload a new version as an NMU with the
maintainer marked as <packa...@qa.debian.org> but strangely that seems
to be what's called for here.
Unless the Poco library can be updated the only way to save Mumble
will be to introduce an epoch in the package version to upload the
now well outdated mumble 1.3.4 again which upstream cannot support
anymore.
Nit: please don't use epochs for that, also see Policy 5.6.12.1.
Hah ... okay so if absolutely required I could upload mumble
"1.5.517+really1.3.4-2". As crazy a version scheme as that is it beats
having to introduce an epoch that I'd have to live with forever, so I'm
glad to know that trick. Thanks.
--
Chris Knadle
chris.kna...@coredump.us
