On 2010-07-06 02:58, Michael Diers wrote: > On 2010-07-03 05:54, Matt Taggart wrote: >> Hi Michael, >> >> Just a couple comments based on the changelog, I haven't looked at the >> packages. > > Matt, > > thanks a bundle for having a look. > >>>> subversion (1.6.12dfsg-1~bpo50+2) lenny-backports; urgency=medium >>>> >>>> * Rebuild for lenny-backports. >>>> * Disable ra_serf, need a newer version than the one in lenny. >> >> How about backporting a newer serf instead so you don't have to lose the >> functionality? As long as the build dependencies and dependencies are >> versioned properly (and you know they already are) then everything will >> just work at build time and run time. The BPO buildd's are also smart >> enough to deal with it. >> >> It looks like it backports cleanly with no changes. >> >> (BTW if you run into a reason why the package doesn't build or run because >> it needs a versioned build-dep/dep to the backport and also file a bug on >> the package to have it added) > > Yes, that would be pretty easy to do. Previous 1.6.x lenny-backports did > not require the updated serf, though. Not sure if it'a a good thing to > introduce a new run-time dependency at this point in time. > >>>> * Build-depend on libdb4.6-dev, suggest db4.6-util. >>>> * Build-depend on openjdk-6-jdk instead of gcj-jdk. >>>> * Depend on openjdk-6-jre-headless instead of gij. >> >> I think these probably make more sense than trying to backport all that >> stuff (assuming everything still works OK with the older versions). > > Well, that's backports.org policy. Admittedly not the OpenJDK part, but > the libdb4.6 bit. One blends in with the "stable" run-time environment. > >> >>>> * control: Fix version control URLs. >> >> I wouldn't bother fixing these for the backport. > > OK, but then again the backport changes are in a different branch than > the "testing" source. Moreover, the bpo50+1 version control URLs were > wrong. And I had to touch debian/control anyway. So there :)
Dear mentors and backporters, here's another attempt at soliciting sponsorship for my update to the Subversion package in lenny-backports. As it stands, the package is a straightforward update to my previous backport 1.6.9dfsg-1~bpo50+1. Unless Matt's comments above are regarded as critical, I kindly ask that the package be uploaded to backports.org. Thank you. -- Michael Diers, elego Software Solutions GmbH, http://www.elego.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
