On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 02:10:29PM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: > "Francesco P. Lovergine" <[email protected]> writes: > > Ok, we found an agreement about a tentative plan for Tcl/Tk. I'm > > submitting this plan to you in order to understand if there is the time > > and will to allow this transition in squeeze. > > > > At the very first stage, we will submit a tcltk-default with 8.5 in > > *experimental* in order to allow all default dependent packages to use 8.5 > > (ideally by just binNMU). > > binNMUs won't work. As the packages are built in an unstable > environment, they will pick up the default from unstable. >
Ok, so I'm going to upload 0days/nmu to force experimental rebuilds. That will be done possibly for other packages with versioned dependencies. I will notify package maintainers about that. > > The 8.4 should be then built without multi-threading, and all packages > > currently depending on tcl/expect 8.3 should instead use 8.4 as > > such. All that could be done in experimental and by NMUs. > > That would be good, as it doesn't interfere with other transitions and > thus everyone can do their work without stepping on someone else's toes :-) > > > If all key packages had no problems on all archs, we could > > consider uploading onto sid and then dropping 8.3. The staging area is > > the only way to avoid unexpected breakages in sid ATM. Of course, we > > could start with staging with or without RMs agreement, but the final > > acceptance for sid will depend on freezing time and RM team decisions. > > In the meantime we will do our home work in experimental. > > Yes, please do so. I don't see a problem to just do this transition in > unstable after it was prepared in edxerimental. > > Marc Thanks. -- Francesco P. Lovergine -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
