On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 09:08:04AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 08:19:12PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > > > Unless someone objects to it, I'll package and upload OCaml 3.09.1 as > > > soon as 3.09.0 is in testing. Do you all agree with a full rebuild? > > Yes, but let's do it like this : > > 3) we ask Steve to requeue all those ocaml related packages for a binNMU, > > and file RC bugs against all those that fail. > > I object this way of making ocaml transitions. > > Generally speaking a new release of ocaml may imply any kind of changes > including, for example, source level incompatibility. I don't want my > packages to be binNMU-ed for making a transition: I want to test them > and perform a regular sourceful upload.
I agree with the spirit of this, too, but I noticed a big difficulty in practice when we went through the 3.09.0 transition. If you depend on lots of other OCaml components, and each one is going through this same process of manual inspection, then the total time until you can rebuild your package is very long (for example, I needed to wait for all the ocamlnet, equeue, pcre, etc. libs to transition). Perhaps we should auto-build everything into experimental first, so developers would have a consistent, new environment to build against. Anything that fails to rebuild could cause a high-priority bug email to the maintainer. Then after Zack's suggested one week period, the successfully built packages (or manually uploaded ones) could go to unstable. -- Eric Cooper e c c @ c m u . e d u -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
