Re: togl 2.0 upload breaking netgen and xcrysden (FTBFS)

[Daniel Leidert]

Andreas Tille wrote:

> I would have loved if you would have given a link to some newer togl
> version 2.1 (I can not find it neither the netgen version you are
> mentioning).

There is a copy (of some sort) in netgen Git:
https://sourceforge.net/p/netgen-mesher/git/ci/master/tree/ng/
https://github.com/live-clones/netgen

I don't know, if this is a fork or a development version or even the
new development place of togl.

> [..]
> BestPractices - simply assume that the target audience of your mail
> knows about transitions.

Well, togl is probably not the proof to that (SCNR). I'd appreciate it,
if you would follow procedures and contact affected package maintainers
or create bug reports in advance next time.

Regards, Daniel

Re: togl 2.0 upload breaking netgen and xcrysden (FTBFS)

[Andreas Tille]

Hi Daniel,

On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 05:21:31PM +0100, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> CCed Andreas, who seems responsible for this

Sorry for messing things up.

> The uncoordinated upload of togl 2.0 into Debian unstable breaks both
> netgen (#889003) and xcrysden (#889906). Togl2 uses a completely different
> API then Togl1.7. Whereas there seems to be at least a netgen version
> shipping (and therefor maybe using) togl 2.1,

I would have loved if you would have given a link to some newer togl
version 2.1 (I can not find it neither the netgen version you are
mentioning).  That would have been more productive than links to
BestPractices - simply assume that the target audience of your mail
knows about transitions.

We have the following situation

  togl 1.7 (released 2006) was never uploaded since 2010
  togl 2.0 (released 2008) had several commits in SVN which I now
   uploaded when doing the Git migration and
   fixing most of the open bugs.

If we use this accident of mine (I admit - an upload to experimental
would have been better) to upgrade way outdated netgen to some recent
version that would be some positive outcome.

> xcrysden can neither be
> fixed easily nor in short terms, thus making it impossible to build it on
> Debian systems.
> 
> This situation could have been easily avoided by following the advice from
> the release team [1] and the best transition practices [2] probably
> leading to a solution like: uploading togl2 as a separate source package
> building and shipping libtogl2-dev and libtogl2 and doing a reasonable
> library transition and giving time to maintainers and upstream authors to
> react. Unfortunately this is no longer an option.
> 
> So I'm asking you, how to proceed from here?

My suggestion would be to upgrade netgen to a version that works with
latest togl.

If it is not possible to port xcrysden maintaining a togl1 package could
be an option - but only if we can *really* maintain it.

Kind regards

Andreas.
 
> [1] https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ReleaseTeam/Transitions
> [2] https://wiki.debian.org/TransitionBestPractices

-- 
http://fam-tille.de

togl 2.0 upload breaking netgen and xcrysden (FTBFS)

[Daniel Leidert]

CCed Andreas, who seems responsible for this

Hi,

The uncoordinated upload of togl 2.0 into Debian unstable breaks both
netgen (#889003) and xcrysden (#889906). Togl2 uses a completely different
API then Togl1.7. Whereas there seems to be at least a netgen version
shipping (and therefor maybe using) togl 2.1, xcrysden can neither be
fixed easily nor in short terms, thus making it impossible to build it on
Debian systems.

This situation could have been easily avoided by following the advice from
the release team [1] and the best transition practices [2] probably
leading to a solution like: uploading togl2 as a separate source package
building and shipping libtogl2-dev and libtogl2 and doing a reasonable
library transition and giving time to maintainers and upstream authors to
react. Unfortunately this is no longer an option.

So I'm asking you, how to proceed from here?

[1] https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ReleaseTeam/Transitions
[2] https://wiki.debian.org/TransitionBestPractices

Daniel