Hi Varun, On Sat, 22 Aug 2009 14:20:11 -0400 Varun Hiremath <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Mirco, > > On Sat, 22 Aug, 2009 at 07:30:10PM +0200, Mirco Bauer wrote: > > Hi Varun, > > > > On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 21:51:56 -0400 > > Varun Hiremath <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hi Micro, > > > > I am not that small *cough* > > I am extremely sorry about that typo. No problem, I am used to that typo already :) > > > > Hmm.. but, won't the old 2.1.5 binary package be removed from the > > > archive once we upload this new version, since the source package > > > name is the same? > > > > Yes, the archive admins are regularly running cleanup processes that > > will remove binary packages that are not build by and source > > package. > > > > This is expected and still will allow a smooth upgrade path for all > > users that have the old version installed and now can install the > > new version without the need of waiting for a completed transition. > > > > Renaming a library package introduces implicitly a transition, all > > rdeps have to be rebuild (and updated build-deps in our case). > > Ok, in that case since all the rdeps: f-spot, dfo and gnome-do-plugins > are under the pkg-cli-apps team, can I upload this new version to > unstable and then update these rdeps accordingly? Should I do some > other tests before uploading libflickrnet2.2-cil to unstable. Theoretical you could, but I would not. It's good if you update the other team maintained source packages but let the "maintainer" (Uploaders) test and upload it. > > I already built dfo and f-spot with the new version and there weren't > any problems but I'm not sure about runtime issues. If the compile succeeds then the API is compatible which is good but still as this is a webservice it should be tested in the individual package too. Notify the maintainers of the changed lib so they can test their packages. > > > > Could you please point me to some policy page which > > > explains this upgrade process for binary package name change? I > > > couldn't find anything on Google. > > > > That's a good question, I don't know any that covers the library > > transitioning part. The simple rename case is described here though: > > http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/pkgs.html#s5.9.3 > > Thanks, I actually looked at that section, but I wasn't sure if it was > referring to change in source package name or binary package name. > > Thanks, > Varun -- Regards, Mirco 'meebey' Bauer PGP-Key ID: 0xEEF946C8 FOSS Developer [email protected] http://www.meebey.net/ PEAR Developer [email protected] http://pear.php.net/ Debian Developer [email protected] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
