[Debian-med-packaging] Bug#606265: Bug#557495: Force sub-directories for both

[Neil Williams]

On Wed, 8 Dec 2010 08:46:40 +0100
Andreas Tille <tille at debian.org> wrote:

> Consequently libctapimkt0-dev was removed from testing (since a long
> time) and this is correct for this package. 

A wishlist for a common interface doesn't seem to me to be sufficient
to stop the library getting into Squeeze - it is usable alone.

> An apropriate thing to do
> would have been to reassign bug #557495 only against libctapimkt0-dev
> which would enable libtowitoko-dev to stay in testing (because there
> is no chance to install both packages together in testing any more).

Any reason why this had not already been done? It is possible to
install both in unstable and that problem alone isn't sufficient, IMHO,
to prevent both going into Squeeze.

> > It was just a hint, no detail, no proof or way for others to test.
> > 
> > This bug isn't enough to prevent either package being in Squeeze -
> 
> The package libctapimkt0-dev is *not* in Squeeze!

Feel free to cancel the delayed upload. However, from your description I
still don't see why it should not be in Squeeze.
 
> I have not expected that people will spend their time on fixing bugs in
> packages which are not in Squeeze. 

The bug was filed against both packages without resolution. I could
have just fixed one side of it but as the fix was trivial fro both, it
seemed to make sense to do it for both. 

> You could have saved your time if
> you would have pinged me about your intend. 

Equally if the bug report had been cloned / commented / updated with
more than the content I've been able to see so far, I would have just
done one side of it.

At this stage of the freeze, RC bug reports which have been open as
long as this one are worth fixing. It seems such a trivial reason to
have to remove the package from Squeeze.

> You have spended time to
> clean up a package with very low popcon which is not intended for
> Squeeze. 

Actually, I've spent more time discussing the lack of content in the
replies to the original bug report than in preparing the upload.

> This is brave and I welcome your work but at least for me
> there are currently more burning issues to do.  If you want me to
> discuss the issue further instead of trusting me that I'm in contact
> with upstream and will handle things with upstream *after* the Squeeze
> release I prefer removing the package for now and adding it later again.

OK - it's in delayed, so feel free to cancel it.

-- 


Neil Williams
=============
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-med-packaging/attachments/20101208/713ea6f5/attachment.pgp>