Re: Upcoming new round of R package rebuilds [FWD: [Rd] R-devel object header changes that require reinstalling packages]

2017-09-19 Thread Andreas Tille
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 03:25:56PM +0200, Johannes Ranke wrote: > > The whole bug report was, pardon my French, complete and utter nonsense. > > Wow. Complete and utter. A bug report affecting 100+ packages that was merged > with two independent bug reports (861684, 862969). And that took from 2

Re: Bug #866601: RFS: segyio package is ready

2017-09-19 Thread Jørgen Kvalsvik
> I am willing to sponsor your package if you accept to put it under the Debian Science Team umbrella. Thank you! I have no problems at all putting segyio under Debian science. > I quickly looked at your packaging and it looks good. One point: you put your packaging under the GPL, while upstream

Re: Upcoming new round of R package rebuilds [FWD: [Rd] R-devel object header changes that require reinstalling packages]

2017-09-19 Thread Johannes Ranke
Am Dienstag, 19. September 2017, 07:40:19 CEST schrieb Dirk Eddelbuettel: > On 19 September 2017 at 14:15, Johannes Ranke wrote: > | > But you escalated it > | > | Mhm. I reported a bug with severity "normal". Maybe the language I used > | was > | too dramatic? > > The whole bug report was, pardo

Re: Bug #866601: RFS: segyio package is ready

2017-09-19 Thread Sébastien Villemot
Dear Jørgen, On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 05:40:06PM +, Jørgen Kvalsvik wrote: > I consider the package segyio ready for consideration in Debian, and I'm > looking for a sponsor for the package. > > Please see https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=866601 and > https://mentors.debian.n

Re: Upcoming new round of R package rebuilds [FWD: [Rd] R-devel object header changes that require reinstalling packages]

2017-09-19 Thread Dirk Eddelbuettel
On 19 September 2017 at 14:15, Johannes Ranke wrote: | > But you escalated it | | Mhm. I reported a bug with severity "normal". Maybe the language I used was | too dramatic? The whole bug report was, pardon my French, complete and utter nonsense. The folks who needed to know already knew. But

Re: Upcoming new round of R package rebuilds [FWD: [Rd] R-devel object header changes that require reinstalling packages]

2017-09-19 Thread Johannes Ranke
> But you escalated it Mhm. I reported a bug with severity "normal". Maybe the language I used was too dramatic? > And the net effect is no current R in testing for a year. Really not a good > outcome. This could still be overcome by introducing versioned Breaks, that could be removed then af

Re: Upcoming new round of R package rebuilds [FWD: [Rd] R-devel object header changes that require reinstalling packages]

2017-09-19 Thread Dirk Eddelbuettel
On 19 September 2017 at 11:07, Johannes Ranke wrote: | Am Montag, 18. September 2017, 10:39:02 CEST schrieb Dirk Eddelbuettel: | > Common knowledge. I referenced it half-a-dozen times in the damned thread | > about the binNMUs. | | This (https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=868558)

Re: Upcoming new round of R package rebuilds [FWD: [Rd] R-devel object header changes that require reinstalling packages]

2017-09-19 Thread Johannes Ranke
Am Montag, 18. September 2017, 10:39:02 CEST schrieb Dirk Eddelbuettel: > On 18 September 2017 at 22:41, Charles Plessy wrote: > | Hello everybody, > | > | I just wanted to relay the information that some R packages will need a > | rebuild after the next upgrade of R. (see the email forwarded bel