Hi debian release Managers! Together with Manuel (the sdlgfx uploader, who reads in cc), we decided to ask for a transition
the package can be found here [1] and brings a really similar API, but the packages that build-deps from it will likely need a binNMU to build against the new ABI/API. We are most sure that mostly of them (if not all of them) will just need a rebuild. Unfortunately the package will go through the new queue (we can avoid that, as explained below), because of the change from libsdl-gfx1.2-4 to libsdl-gfx1.2-5. http://packages.qa.debian.org/s/sdlgfx.html # reverse-depends -b src:sdlgfx Reverse-Build-Depends-Indep =========================== * libalien-sdl-perl (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * taoframework (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) Reverse-Build-Depends ===================== * angband (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * balder2d (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * ballerburg (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * blocks-of-the-undead (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * brainparty (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * clanlib (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * dd2 (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * enigma (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * freedink (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * freedroidrpg (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * freetennis (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * freewheeling (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * gambas3 (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * haskell-sdl-gfx (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * haskell-sdl-image (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * hyperrogue (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * infon (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * iulib (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * lincity-ng (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * luola (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * mana (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * manaplus (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * mousetrap (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * ocamlsdl (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * openssn (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * qonk (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * sitplus (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * tome (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * warmux (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) * widelands (for libsdl-gfx1.2-dev) thanks for your time, have a nice new year, Gianfranco [1] http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-sdl/packages/sdlgfx.git Il Sabato 28 Dicembre 2013 13:49, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo <[email protected]> ha scritto: 2013/12/22 Gianfranco Costamagna <[email protected]>: >>> Il Domenica 22 Dicembre 2013 0:19, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo >>> <[email protected]> ha scritto: >> >>> > 2013/12/21 Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo <[email protected]>: >>>>> I can help of course, I'm trying to get more and more involved in >>> debian (I'm a DM since some months now, but I started contributing more than >>> one year ago in the debian alioth gits) >>>>> >>>>> I'll be glad to help, altough sometimes I still make mistakes (the >>> .24 wasn't uploaded because the ABI/API changed and nobody bumped the >>> soname... >>>>> >>>>> I pushed everything on alioth! >>>> >>>> OK, thanks, I will review it. >>> >>> So I reviewed it and pushed the changes, which is mostly to squash the >>> changelog of .24 and .25 together and minor packaging changes which >>> probably are not important (didn't remember to commit separately, >>> sorry). >>> >> >> Wonderful! That was in my plans, but I was too lazy to to it :) > >So is it OK to go for you, other than waiting for the transition? > > >>> I think that the bump in SONAME will bring the following complications: >>> >>> - the binary .deb has a new name, thus has to go through the FTP >>> master's NEW queue (and can take weeks/months) >>> >>> - all reverse-depends will have to be recompiled against the new >>> version (probably binNMU is enough, but since there are ~30 or so I >>> guess that some of them will fail to compile and complicate the >>> transition) >>> >>> - I think that a transition should be opened with Release Managers, >>> the number of packages is high enough >>> >>> I wonder if we can do something like the following to avoid at least >>> the 1st step: >>> >>> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=549110 >>> >>> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=54;filename=sdlgfx-2.0.20-1.1-nmu.diff;att=1;bug=549110 >> >> For this part I don't know the best solution honestly... >> I tried the possible to avoid the new queue stall, but maybe since this is >> an API/ABI change is good to change everything and to have a package name >> coherent with the new sdl API/ABI. >> >> for the transition yes, I think we should open a transition and ask for >> binNMU, I hope everything will go smoothless, since the changes weren't so >> deep, at least in the API (some internal function were removed, and some bug >> fixed, nothing more if I remember correctly) > >OK, so please speak with Release Managers and keep this list in copy >so we can chime in if necessary, and do the actual uploads. > > >> (I'll look for sdl2 soon I hope) > >OK, let me know when it's ready to review. This is less problematic >and we can upload once it's ready, since we don't have to care about >API/ABI changes. > >Just try to keep things as close as possible to the other libsdl2* >packages so everybody can treat all the modules as having the same >structure and config, and we can apply changes to packaging widely, >it's easier to understand and less error-prone. If there are things >that you don't like and can be improved in other modules they should >be fixed in them as well, and not only improve the gfx module. > > > >Cheers. >-- >Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo <[email protected]> > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
