On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 01:02:09AM +0100, Enrico Zini wrote: > On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 12:51:35AM +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
> > Unfortunately is not going to happen as soon as we wanted due to a new > > aptitude upload... > This kind of scenario made me think... would it make sense to publish in > a fixed location a machine-readable scenario of current ongoing > transitions, then have dput fetch it and print a warning in case one is > going to upload a package that would step in someone's feet? http://ftp-master.debian.org/testing/update_output.txt.gz is already published; it's possible to parse this to get a list of both packages that are currently hinted, and packages that are currently accepted only as part of an ongoing hint run. I don't think I agree that dput should attempt to pull this information prior to any upload. How is dput to know the difference between an upload to an "official" repo, and a local repo? I think maintainers need to be cognizant of their packages' involvement in transitions, but I'm not sure that's the right way to accomplish it. Ideally, maintainers would be aware of whether their packages aren't up-to-date in testing (something they should be interested in for their own sakes), and be aware of when this indicates a library transition. This is harder now that binNMUs are widely used, but certainly in the case of aptitude this was a sourceful upload on the part of the maintainer and just a look at his qa page would have shown it wasn't up-to-date in testing. But evidently this isn't how (some) maintainers work today. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
