Bug#942135: Сannot install Perl 5.30.0-6 without deleting the libgtk2-perl package

[Dominic Hargreaves]

On Sat, Jan 02, 2021 at 08:22:48AM +0100, intrigeri wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Dominic Hargreaves (2020-11-10):
> > On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 09:03:42AM +0100, intrigeri wrote:
> >> Dominic Hargreaves (2020-11-09):
> >> > A year on, it seems there's almost no realistic prospect of this
> >> > package coming back. Shall we remove it from sid?
> >> 
> >> Thank you for caring!
> >> 
> >> Quoting the plan I proposed #912860: "I intend to remove libgtk2-perl
> >> from testing soon after the Buster release, and then from sid later
> >> during the Bullseye development cycle".
> 
> > We're quite a way through the bullseye development cycle already but
> > I guess you mean once we're into the deep freeze when there is no longer
> > any chance of reviving those packages for bullseye, which makes sense
> > to me.
> 
> Actually, when writing my previous message here, I misread my own
> initial proposal. You're indeed correct that under this proposal,
> we could remove libgtk2-perl from sid right away. Thank you for
> your patience! :)
> 
> Given the upcoming freeze, I'd like to give the maintainers of the
> reverse-dependencies a last chance to get their package in Bullseye
> before migration of new source packages to testing is disabled
> (2021-02-12), which would be required if we removed libgtk2-perl and
> all its reverse-dependencies right away.
> 
> In particular:
> 
>  - tinyca: a few months ago the maintainer was actively working on
>    a solution
> 
>  - gprename: upstream ported to GTK 3, now waiting for the new release
>    to be packaged & uploaded
> 
> So, I'm now leaning towards removing libgtk2-perl and its remaining
> reverse-dependencies from sid at any time after 2021-02-12 (I don't
> care much when exactly). At that point, indeed it'll be too late for
> these packages to go into Bullseye, and their maintainers will have
> 2 years to find a solution.
> 
> Does this make sense to you?

Sure, sounds good!