Re: Tracking ghc transition on http://release.debian.org/transitions/
On 03/29/2011 08:27 PM, Joachim Breitner wrote: Hi release team, the transitions monitors on http://release.debian.org/transitions/ look useful, and I guess it makes more sense to use an existing instance instead of setting up the software ourself on alioth. Would that be possible? Can you please give us some update on this? Especially, what to do about those in unknown state? what's missing? Regards, -- Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي http://dogguy.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4da1ed9b.8050...@dogguy.org
Re: Tracking ghc transition on http://release.debian.org/transitions/
Hi, Am Sonntag, den 10.04.2011, 19:49 +0200 schrieb Mehdi Dogguy: On 03/29/2011 08:27 PM, Joachim Breitner wrote: Hi release team, the transitions monitors on http://release.debian.org/transitions/ look useful, and I guess it makes more sense to use an existing instance instead of setting up the software ourself on alioth. Would that be possible? Can you please give us some update on this? Especially, what to do about those in unknown state? what's missing? manpower/time is the only constraint at the moment. Usually with a new ghc version, binNMUs can take care of that (and we just saw that for the portion of packages already renamed: I uploaded ghc-7.0.3 today and scheduled binNMUs, and thanks to edos-debcheck, hash-based dependencies and now autosigning, i386 is almost done recompiling them). But because we have to change the package names, we need to do sourceful uploads of all haskell libraries. And for that they have to be manually build, in the right order etc... Also the packages have to go through NEW, but that is sufficient quick, as the ftp-masters are aware of the transition. Usually there are more active people in the DHG, but it seems we have hit an unfortunate point, with basically only me doing uploads. I’m doing a few every day but it is tedious, de-motivating and time-consuming. If we had source-only uploads, I could just automatically prepare the source pages with only the renaming and no other change, upload all at once and leave it to wanna-build to sort out the build order. This would speed up the process considerably, but I guess we are not there yet. The package are shown as unknown because the script looks at the old binary packages, for neither of the good/bad predicates hold. So here, unknown = bad. If you would like a neater view, you can change the predicates as follows (If the regex anchors work as intended.): * Affected: .build-depends ~ /ghc6?/ * Good: .build-depends ~ /^ghc$/ * Bad: .build-depends ~ /^ghc$/ Is there more information that you need? Greetings, Joachim -- Joachim nomeata Breitner Debian Developer nome...@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C JID: nome...@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Tracking ghc transition on http://release.debian.org/transitions/
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 23:57:19 +0530, Joachim Breitner wrote: Hi release team, the transitions monitors on http://release.debian.org/transitions/ look useful, and I guess it makes more sense to use an existing instance instead of setting up the software ourself on alioth. Would that be possible? For the ghc transition, these settings should do, if I guess the syntax correctly: Affected: .build-depends ~ /ghc6?/ Good: .depends ~ /libghc-base-dev.*/ Bad: .depends ~ /libghc6-base-dev.*/ Added at http://release.debian.org/transitions/ghc7.html Let me know if that needs changes. Cheers, Julien -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110331140646.gy3...@radis.liafa.jussieu.fr
Re: Tracking ghc transition on http://release.debian.org/transitions/
Hi Julien, Am Donnerstag, den 31.03.2011, 16:06 +0200 schrieb Julien Cristau: On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 23:57:19 +0530, Joachim Breitner wrote: the transitions monitors on http://release.debian.org/transitions/ look useful, and I guess it makes more sense to use an existing instance instead of setting up the software ourself on alioth. Would that be possible? For the ghc transition, these settings should do, if I guess the syntax correctly: Affected: .build-depends ~ /ghc6?/ Good: .depends ~ /libghc-base-dev.*/ Bad: .depends ~ /libghc6-base-dev.*/ Added at http://release.debian.org/transitions/ghc7.html Let me know if that needs changes. thanks, very nice. @DHG: That’s a nice TODO list, isn’t it... I’m surprised by the dependency level calculation – haskell-transformers should be on one level with -deepseq. But maybe that calculation is confused as the binary package names are changing during the transition. Greetings, Joachim -- Joachim nomeata Breitner Debian Developer nome...@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C JID: nome...@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Tracking ghc transition on http://release.debian.org/transitions/
Le 31/03/2011 20:35, Joachim Breitner a écrit : I’m surprised by the dependency level calculation – haskell-transformers should be on one level with -deepseq. But maybe that calculation is confused as the binary package names are changing during the transition. The code assumes (among other things) that there are no loops in the dependency graph. I don't know exactly what meaningful information it could convey when there are loops in the dependency graph. Cheers, -- Stéphane -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d94f6b3.8080...@debian.org
