[Pkg-openldap-devel] Revisiting the TODO list for 2.4.7

[Steve Langasek]

So let's see where we are now with the todo list for 2.4.7 in unstable:

On Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 03:09:20PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> 1) get symbol versioning support into the package for libldap, so that we
>    cut down the segfaulting with partial upgrades

This is in place now; there are some concerns about the libldap_r vs.
libldap handling, and the patch needs work before being pushed upstream, but
it should be suitable for release to unstable (and lenny, as necessary).

> 2) make a decision on whether db4.6 is ready for switching now, or if we
>    should be waiting for resolution of the NPTL yield() issue described in
>    #421946 before making the jump

Looks like the answer here is that it's not ready yet, so we should stay
with db4.2.

> 3) proper upgrade support for 2.3.39->2.4.7 databases

Done.

> 4) upgrade testing

I know Russ has done some of these tests, and I have as well.  I believe all
the issues reported so far have been resolved in svn.

> 5) install testing

Seems to work ok for me; anyone else have a different assessment?

> 6) decide what other package handling, if any, needs to be put in place in
>    response to slurpd being dropped (I guess someone who's used syncrepl
>    should provide input here, since I have not)

Patch for this is on the list.  So once any problems with this patch are
worked out, the original todo list seems done, or at least done enough to
support an upload to unstable.

But we also have the question of the updated debconf templates.  As you can
see from my latest post, I'm really not happy with the proposed changes as
they stand, and I don't believe they should be included in an upload to
unstable as-is.  I'm willing to wait for us to converge on a set of
templates before the 2.4.7 upload, but I don't think we should wait for
updated debconf translations before getting more eyeballs on the packages;
in any case the latest patch for syncrepl necessarily brings in a new
debconf template which would significantly delay the upload if we had to
wait for all translations to be up-to-date.

So I propose that if there are no other issues turned up in the meantime, we
do the 2.4.7-1 upload as soon as the debconf template discussion is
finished.  Is this agreeable?

-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek at ubuntu.com                                     vorlon at debian.org