Your message dated Tue, 29 Apr 2014 08:58:26 +0200
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#734588: transition sdlgfx 2.0.23 to 2.0.25
has caused the Debian Bug report #734588,
regarding transition sdlgfx 2.0.23 to 2.0.25
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
734588: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=734588
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: [email protected]
Usertags: transition
(opening a bug, sorry for double posting)
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]>
>>
>>
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 08:45:34 +0100, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
> Uploaded and built.
> http://packages.qa.debian.org/s/sdlgfx.html
>
It migrated to testing, and so did the rebuilt reverse deps.
Cheers,
Julien
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
--- End Message ---
