[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: diaspora dependency status - help needed



On Wednesday 14 October 2015 04:19 PM, Per Andersson wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> I didn't have time to look into everything but what is still left to do?
> Almost everything I had a look at was already resolved or had
> some way forward suggusted?
> 

Main blocker is https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=790537

We have a test machine at pod.pxq.in if anyone wants to use.

>> ruby-redcarpet differ by minor version. Since its ruby 2.2 tests are
>> failing I need help updating it.
> 
> Did you resolve the rudy-redcarpet issue?
> 

Nopes, upstream closed the issue saying its debian specific.
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=797101

>> ruby-roxml has a newer release in debian, but upstream is reluctant to
>> update it as it is a core dependency.
>>
>> Option 1: Test upstream with the new version and convince them to update it.
>> Option 2: embed the required version until the issue is solved upstream.
>>
>> I will try option 1 and if that does not work in a reasonable amount of
>> time (say 1 month), I will go for option 2. Any help is welcome.
>>
>> Tiny/Patch release difference:
>>
>> rails-timeago: It seems upstream is reluctant because of a bug in the
>> new version. I don't know if it is really worth embedding it.
> 
> Can't you just use the new version? Or is there any incompability between
> the two?

I can force the new version, but then upstream won't support. They
insist on exact same versions of dependencies. I tried to convince them
to relax some, but some core developers are hostile towards debian. If
there are enough people who can support a different dependency chain in
debian, that would be another option.

> Is #796979 resolved?

yes, this is a validation of upstream fears for not relaxing even patch
version changes :( Switching back to older version fixed it.

Now ready to update diaspora to 0.5.4.0

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: