[pkg-gnupg-maint] gpg-error, assuan, gpgme, gnupg

[Daniel Kahn Gillmor]

Hi Andreas--

On Thu 2024-08-01 19:40:49 +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> I can probably do the three uploads on Saturday on Sunday but feel free
> to upload if you have some time to spare. I have done the
> (fast-forward)-merges.

thanks!  If you're ok with doing it, i'm happy to let you go ahead with it.

> We will need small a transition here, too:
> | Splitting of the qt devel
> | packages (#863149) will require an intermediate upload to unstable with
> | just adding a Provides: libqgpgme-dev to libgpgmepp-dev, followed by
> | changing all packagages (build)-depending on QT gpgme to add a
> | (build)-dep on the new package name. Only once that is finished gpgme
> | with qt5/6-dev as separate packages could be uploaded to unstable.
>
> I am not sure about the new package name "libqgpgme-dev" perhaps
> "libqgpgmeqt5-dev" would be better?

Maybe it would be good to get some feedback about preferred naming from
the qgpgme consumers?  I know that some of the plasma folks were asking
for this; can you check in with them to see what they'd prefer?

I don't have much of a preference, other than that i tend to want to not
have to think about version numbers in -dev package names for the
"default" (preferred, supported) version of a package.

> I am not pushing for gnupg 2.5, but being able to build/develop for it
> in Debian is something that would be nice to offer.

agreed, it makes sense to have the dependencies in place, so long as
they don't include breaking changes or interoperability failures, even
if we think the dependent package isn't something that we should be
widely distributed at this point.

Thanks for doing this work!

Regards,

        --dkg
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 324 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-gnupg-maint/attachments/20240802/11d08d07/attachment.sig>