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

Re: Sponsor upload needed for fix to package frog



Hi Mattia,

Quoting Mattia Rizzolo (2016-11-23 01:44:50)
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 07:14:22PM +0100, Maarten van Gompel wrote:
> > Packages ucto and frog have been updated
> > accordingly to depend on it (no new upstream). The three packages are ready for upload now.
> 
> starting with frog:
> 
> * git repo is missing the tag for the last upload

Added

> * please revert eec388092aae834ed4dd6643b524861faca64356
> * and also 941f7477add917bc757d4123cba4336fe94b141e (unless it really
>   does need a newer ucto dependency, does it really?!  the generated
>   binary dependency is not versioned (and how could it without proper
>   symbol file...), so I very much doubt forcing a build order between
>   ucto and frog means really something at the end (if it has issues
>   building against a ucto built against a different version of libfolia
>   than the one frog is currently building against, then it should fail
>   the build; but this is actually a rarer issue that you might think).

Ok, so you're saying I don't need to force a higher libfolia version despite
the new so version? Will bug
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=843053 still be fixed this
way?

> * the "[ Name Surname ]" thing in the changelog is only needed if
>   different people made changes for that single upload; if you're alone
>   you can remove it

Right, fixed

> * you have a bunch of trailing newlines in changelog

Fixed

> for ucto:
> 
> well, not much to do considering I reviewed the last upload :P
> Just, don't bump the build-dep.  If you have no changes to do in this
> package, what you want is a
>     No-change upload to rebuild against libfolia5
> like we do in Ubuntu; or ask the release team to schedule a binNMU
> (which effectively achieves the very same, just bothering more people
> for nothing in this case, if you ask me..).

Ok, I reverted the changes, it's indeed a no-change upload then, no version
number change at all, is that valid? Let's indeed not bother people needlessly.

If so, frog and ucto should be in order now.

> I'm also waiting for the auto-transitioner to notice the libfolia upload
> and create a transition tracker to have more assurance those are the
> only 2 rdeps.

I'd be very surprised (and very pleasantly so) if a third party uses our
library AND packages his software for debian :) But I understand the precaution
yes.

Ciao,

--

Maarten van Gompel
    Centre for Language Studies
    Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen

proycon@anaproy.nl
http://proycon.anaproy.nl
http://github.com/proycon

GnuPG key:  0x1A31555C  
XMPP: proycon@anaproy.nl  Matrix: @proycon:anaproy.nl
Telegram:   proycon       IRC: proycon (freenode)
Twitter:    https://twitter.com/proycon
Bitcoin:    1BRptZsKQtqRGSZ5qKbX2azbfiygHxJPsd

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: signature


Reply to: