Bug#709758: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)

2013-09-04 Thread Lucas Nussbaum
On 04/09/13 at 12:13 +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
 On Mi, 04 Sep 2013, Ben Hutchings wrote:
  How much do those packages weigh, Norbert?  Are TeX transitional
  packages particularly heavy?
 
 In kg? In bit? In work time?
 
  I really don't know why you think TeX is exempt from the usual
  requirements to support clean upgrades between Debian releases.
 
 Please try it before complaining. Clean upgrades are working with
   dist-upgrade

I tried:
- in wheezy, install texlive-lang-danish
- change sources.list to point to sid
- apt-get update ; apt-get dist-upgrade
- texlive-lang-danish gets removed (as well as texlive-common
  and texlive-doc-base), but texlive-lang-european doesn't get
  installed.

You need transitional packages here.

Lucas


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org



Bug#709758: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)

2013-09-04 Thread Norbert Preining
On Mi, 04 Sep 2013, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
   requirements to support clean upgrades between Debian releases.

 - texlive-lang-danish gets removed (as well as texlive-common
   and texlive-doc-base), but texlive-lang-european doesn't get
   installed.

Yes, and? Was the dist-upgrade disturbed?
We are talking about normal systems, that is having telxive or texlive-full
installed. Not pathological cases of only t-l-d installed.

 You need transitional packages here.

I *can* provide transitional packages to make it nice for the user
experience. I don't remember a requirement in the Debian policy for that.

Norbert


PREINING, Norbert   http://www.preining.info
JAIST, Japan TeX Live  Debian Developer
DSA: 0x09C5B094   fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76  A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org



Bug#709758: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)

2013-09-04 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi,

On Mittwoch, 4. September 2013, Norbert Preining wrote:
 Yes, and? Was the dist-upgrade disturbed?
 We are talking about normal systems, that is having telxive or texlive-full
 installed. Not pathological cases of only t-l-d installed.

wheezy has:

Package: texlive-lang
Binary: texlive-lang-african, texlive-lang-arabic, texlive-lang-armenian, 
texlive-lang-cjk, texlive-lang-croatian, texlive-lang-cyrillic, texlive-lang-
czechslovak, texlive-lang-danish, texlive-lang-dutch, texlive-lang-finnish, 
texlive-lang-french, texlive-lang-german, texlive-lang-greek, texlive-lang-
hebrew, texlive-lang-hungarian, texlive-lang-indic, texlive-lang-italian, 
texlive-lang-latin, texlive-lang-latvian, texlive-lang-lithuanian, texlive-
lang-mongolian, texlive-lang-norwegian, texlive-lang-other, texlive-lang-
polish, texlive-lang-portuguese, texlive-lang-spanish, texlive-lang-swedish, 
texlive-lang-tibetan, texlive-lang-english, texlive-lang-vietnamese, texlive-
lang-all, ptex-bin

sid has:

Package: texlive-lang
Binary: texlive-lang-african, texlive-lang-arabic, texlive-lang-cjk, texlive-
lang-cyrillic, texlive-lang-czechslovak, texlive-lang-english, texlive-lang-
european, texlive-lang-french, texlive-lang-german, texlive-lang-greek, 
texlive-lang-indic, texlive-lang-italian, texlive-lang-other, texlive-lang-
polish, texlive-lang-portuguese, texlive-lang-spanish, texlive-lang-all, ptex-
bin, thailatex

which other binary packages build by texlive-lang do you consider 
pathological to use?
 
 I *can* provide transitional packages to make it nice for the user
 experience. I don't remember a requirement in the Debian policy for that.

#569219 and #323066 suggest this is a best practice for years. 
https://wiki.debian.org/PackageTransition might be helpful too.


cheers,
Holger, who considers just to build-depend on texlive-lang-all | and be 

done with this


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Bug#709758: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)

2013-09-04 Thread Norbert Preining
On Mi, 04 Sep 2013, Holger Levsen wrote:
 which other binary packages build by texlive-lang do you consider 
 pathological to use?

I considered the installation of one -lang package by itself without
actual latex package pathological.

   Holger, who considers just to build-depend on texlive-lang-all | and be 
 
   done with this

Since TL2005 that is nearly 8 years ago we practiuically haven't change
anything in the naming.

And now that there are a few changes ... sudenly the world collapses.

Ohh, I have to be careful otherwise Ian comes agian after me threatening
me with consequences ... soo scary.



Norbert


PREINING, Norbert   http://www.preining.info
JAIST, Japan TeX Live  Debian Developer
DSA: 0x09C5B094   fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76  A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org



Bug#709758: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)

2013-09-04 Thread Lucas Nussbaum
On 04/09/13 at 20:52 +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
 On Mi, 04 Sep 2013, Holger Levsen wrote:
  which other binary packages build by texlive-lang do you consider 
  pathological to use?
 
 I considered the installation of one -lang package by itself without
 actual latex package pathological.

OK, let's try again:
- in wheezy, install texlive and texlive-lang-dutch
- dist-upgrade to sid: texlive-lang-dutch is removed, texlive-lang-european
  is not installed
That's wrong.

  Holger, who considers just to build-depend on texlive-lang-all | and be 
  
  done with this
 
 Since TL2005 that is nearly 8 years ago we practiuically haven't change
 anything in the naming.
 
 And now that there are a few changes ... sudenly the world collapses.

It's not about world collapse. It's about doing upgrades without
removing functionality when it's possible, which is something we care
about in Debian AFAIK. Why should texlive be different?

Lucas


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org



Bug#709758: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)

2013-09-04 Thread Ian Jackson
clone 709758 -1
reassign -1 src:texlive-lang
retitle -1 Transitional packages for going-away texlive-lang-*
thanks

I'm cloning the original bug report to make a new report for this
issue as described by Lucas:

Lucas Nussbaum writes (Re: Bug#709758: Replacing a binary package by another 
one(was: Communication issue?)):
 OK, let's try again:
 - in wheezy, install texlive and texlive-lang-dutch
 - dist-upgrade to sid: texlive-lang-dutch is removed, texlive-lang-european
   is not installed
 That's wrong.

Thanks,
Ian.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org



Bug#709758: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)

2013-09-04 Thread Peter Samuelson

[Norbert Preining]
 On Di, 03 Sep 2013, Peter Samuelson wrote:
  texlive-lang-european?  It doesn't look like it to me (no Breaks or
  Conflicts), but I haven't actually tried it.
 
 conflicts there are, texlive-base conflicts with all the old packages.

I misspoke.  There is a Conflicts in texlive-base, but what is probably
needed is Provides in texlive-lang-european.  As I understand it, that
will prompt apt to DTRT on upgrade.

Since nobody is worried about versioned dependencies here, I think that
would suffice.  No need for 30 transitional packages.  But I haven't
tested it.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org



Bug#709758: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)

2013-09-04 Thread Steve Langasek
On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 12:55:46PM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
 [Norbert Preining]
  On Di, 03 Sep 2013, Peter Samuelson wrote:
   texlive-lang-european?  It doesn't look like it to me (no Breaks or
   Conflicts), but I haven't actually tried it.

  conflicts there are, texlive-base conflicts with all the old packages.

 I misspoke.  There is a Conflicts in texlive-base, but what is probably
 needed is Provides in texlive-lang-european.  As I understand it, that
 will prompt apt to DTRT on upgrade.

Unless apt has gotten smarter recently (which is not out of the question),
no.  It's a common misconception that apt will care about Provides/Replaces
for selecting new packages on dist-upgrade, but while it seems like a nice
idea, TTBOMK it's never been implemented.

-- 
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 Developerhttp://www.debian.org/
slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Bug#709758: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)

2013-09-04 Thread Norbert Preining
severity 721838 whishlist
tags 721838 pending
thanks

Norbert


PREINING, Norbert   http://www.preining.info
JAIST, Japan TeX Live  Debian Developer
DSA: 0x09C5B094   fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76  A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org



Bug#709758: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)

2013-09-03 Thread David Prévot
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

Hi again,

Le 03/09/2013 03:37, Norbert Preining a écrit :
 On Di, 03 Sep 2013, David Prévot wrote:

 if you’re in a hurry to see your package reach testing,
 feel free to provide back the binary packages you removed (via
 convenient dummy transitional packages) instead of breaking any third
 party due to their uncoordinated disappearance.
 
 Umpf, uncoordinated disappearance.

I’ve been told that my previous suggestion was not clearly worded, so
let me try to be a little more specific.

I was directly proposing that, instead of silently removing the
texlive-lang-danish — and at least texlive-lang-norwegian — binary
packages, they could be added back as dummy transitional packages
depending on texlive-lang-european (that is, as far as we were able to
guess, providing the texlive-lang-danish — and texlive-lang-norwegian —
features). That way, this transition is not tight to the celerity third
party packages are able to cope with the change in our archive. As an
added value, any third parties (including those not in the Debian
archive) can benefit of a smooth upgrade instead of a disruptive change.

I’ve witnessed many such transitions, they even usually are kept in the
following stable release (so stable-to-stable upgrades are not too
disruptive for those third parties, and our users). I failed to come up
with a best practice URL documenting such transition, is someone able to
provide one, or correct me if I’ve made that up? (Maybe the dev-ref
would be the appropriate place to document such transition, I’m willing
to propose a patch if it’s worth it.)

Regards

David


-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJSJkM5AAoJEAWMHPlE9r085uMH/2IK81w446ORP7cB8B4uOR0N
GtBxEWer6rSwvgA87HmH+ONtaVyUPyXQ+X5i1sN08FQNwWgl8+N4u8xbqYJwKu4e
8+Ogel85pY4hZqk8tuVz/EJC1QVVpKPKccbOZB0TmKfV0jHXwbZt8PhHB22V2Xsl
QC01rzATU9qvxxws2BZEZg7fOPdmRPv0coG/rJwMgIA11pYmEFIGw1iVZc2mxSor
frMH9URLXsgxrCy1RD8/tdq7LzB9ETaae+3xOa+Gt9S5UZ1Oce2SqLQtk26roKIM
trE0is5MVujlQnnwF226ozSO66LJ9DzvGdtFaT6H18paohc9V4JJZB0pgr1KlhE=
=QhU4
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org



Bug#709758: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)

2013-09-03 Thread Norbert Preining
Hi David,

On Di, 03 Sep 2013, David Prévot wrote:
 I was directly proposing that, instead of silently removing the
 texlive-lang-danish — and at least texlive-lang-norwegian — binary
 packages, they could be added back as dummy transitional packages

I understood your proposal, of course. Still, since there are no rdepends
besides very few (1?) build-depends on these two packages, I consider
it a a waste of resources. 

I repeat my point, these changes happen on major upgrades. If many
packages are concerned, a mass bug filing is the way to go. Since
we are talking about *one* package that in addition is extremly simple
to fix, I don't consider it useful or necessary to provide transitional
packages. dist-upgrade will remove these packages during upgrade from
stable to next-stable, so nothing to worry.

 I’ve witnessed many such transitions, they even usually are kept in the
 following stable release (so stable-to-stable upgrades are not too
 disruptive for those third parties, and our users). I failed to come up

Nothing disruptive here, dist-upgrade removes conflicting packages
that have no dependencies anymore.

Norbert


PREINING, Norbert   http://www.preining.info
JAIST, Japan TeX Live  Debian Developer
DSA: 0x09C5B094   fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76  A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org



Bug#709758: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)

2013-09-03 Thread Peter Samuelson

[Norbert Preining]
 I understood your proposal, of course. Still, since there are no rdepends
 besides very few (1?) build-depends on these two packages, I consider
 it a a waste of resources. 

Sounds like you are saying 'texlive-lang-danish' is only useful as a
package dependency - in other words, users would never install it
explicitly because they want its functionality.  Is that correct?  This
is not clear from the package description, which at least to me looks
like something users _would_ install explicitly:

Description-en: TeX Live: Danish
 Support for typesetting Danish.
 .
 This package includes the following CTAN packages:
  hyphen-danish -- Danish hyphenation patterns.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org



Bug#709758: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)

2013-09-03 Thread Norbert Preining
On Di, 03 Sep 2013, Peter Samuelson wrote:
 Sounds like you are saying 'texlive-lang-danish' is only useful as a
 package dependency - in other words, users would never install it
 explicitly because they want its functionality.  Is that correct?  This

I never said that. The functionality is now in
texlive-lang-european


Norbert


PREINING, Norbert   http://www.preining.info
JAIST, Japan TeX Live  Debian Developer
DSA: 0x09C5B094   fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76  A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org



Bug#709758: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)

2013-09-03 Thread Peter Samuelson

  Sounds like you are saying 'texlive-lang-danish' is only useful as a
  package dependency - in other words, users would never install it
  explicitly because they want its functionality.  Is that correct?  This

[Norbert Preining]
 I never said that. The functionality is now in
   texlive-lang-european

I can see that.  But your argument for removing texlive-lang-danish
etc. is basically there are almost no rdeps.  But that is only half
the story.  The other half is to explain what will happen to users who
installed texlive-lang-danish because they want Danish language
hyphenation support.  When they upgrade, will they get
texlive-lang-european?  It doesn't look like it to me (no Breaks or
Conflicts), but I haven't actually tried it.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org



Bug#709758: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)

2013-09-03 Thread Norbert Preining
On Di, 03 Sep 2013, Peter Samuelson wrote:
 texlive-lang-european?  It doesn't look like it to me (no Breaks or
 Conflicts), but I haven't actually tried it.

conflicts there are, texlive-base conflicts with all the old packages.

TL2013 made big changes to the naming of packages. If I go down
the road you suggest I have to introduce about 30 transitional
packages ... 

Simple answer: No.

If someone wants to, I am fine to hand over the maintainance of TL
to those who think they can handle it.

I will not carry 30+ transitional packages.

Norbert


PREINING, Norbert   http://www.preining.info
JAIST, Japan TeX Live  Debian Developer
DSA: 0x09C5B094   fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76  A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org



Bug#709758: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)

2013-09-03 Thread Ben Hutchings
On Wed, 2013-09-04 at 10:57 +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
 On Di, 03 Sep 2013, Peter Samuelson wrote:
  texlive-lang-european?  It doesn't look like it to me (no Breaks or
  Conflicts), but I haven't actually tried it.
 
 conflicts there are, texlive-base conflicts with all the old packages.
 
 TL2013 made big changes to the naming of packages. If I go down
 the road you suggest I have to introduce about 30 transitional
 packages ... 
 
 Simple answer: No.
 
 If someone wants to, I am fine to hand over the maintainance of TL
 to those who think they can handle it.
 
 I will not carry 30+ transitional packages.

How much do those packages weigh, Norbert?  Are TeX transitional
packages particularly heavy?

I really don't know why you think TeX is exempt from the usual
requirements to support clean upgrades between Debian releases.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
If you seem to know what you are doing, you'll be given more to do.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Bug#709758: Replacing a binary package by another one(was: Communication issue?)

2013-09-03 Thread Norbert Preining
On Mi, 04 Sep 2013, Ben Hutchings wrote:
 How much do those packages weigh, Norbert?  Are TeX transitional
 packages particularly heavy?

In kg? In bit? In work time?

 I really don't know why you think TeX is exempt from the usual
 requirements to support clean upgrades between Debian releases.

Please try it before complaining. Clean upgrades are working with
dist-upgrade

And now I leave this discussion, I have enough of it. I complained
about a *serious* bug not being fixed although patches and fixes
are known, and at the end it is me hahahahaha. Go and have
fun yourself.

Norbert


PREINING, Norbert   http://www.preining.info
JAIST, Japan TeX Live  Debian Developer
DSA: 0x09C5B094   fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76  A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org