[Pkg-zope-developers] Re: zope-common and dh-zope, new packages

[martin f krafft]

--jRHKVT23PllUwdXP
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

also sprach Fabio Tranchitella <kobold@kobold.it> [2005.03.28.2049 +0200]:
> Another thing, as far as I can see Luca De Vitis (luca@debian.org)
> is MIA, so I was wondering about adopting some of his packages and
> getting rid of some others (like zope-cmf, now we have zope-cmf1.4
> and we'll have soon zope-cmf1.5). Also zope (which we should adapt
> to zope-common) has no maintainer uploads for more than an year.
> Have you more fresh infos about this?

Nope. Anyway, zope-cmf1.3 must continue to exist as long as there
are packages in stable that depend on it. Right now, plone 1.0.6
does.

> This stuff is still experimental, but working and in my opinion we
> *should try* to get it into sarge (if not all, at least
> zope-common). Is there someone which could help me?

I can help. The first step is to upload all the packages to
experimental. I see that you have already amended the version
numbers. I also see that some of them are now like 1.3.2-0+exp0. Are
these 1.3.2 pre-releases, or did you mess up the version by
accident?

> The transition to this new layout=20
> isn't so painfull,

=2E.. well, except it broke my setup, and I cannot find out anymore
why. The point is: we must test this many times on existing 2.6
machines, some of which should be kept at 2.6, some of which are
migrated to 2.7, and some of which will have 2.6 and 2.7 coexist.
All that must work. Only then will I consider uploading to unstable.

We can upload zope-common, but only if it either does not interfere
with 2.6 installations, or if it has been thoroughly tested.

> I hope someone will have enough time to test these packages and to
> provide me a feedback.

yeah, count me in.

--=20
 .''`.     martin f. krafft <madduck@debian.org>
: :'  :    proud Debian developer, admin, user, and author
`. `'`
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system
=20
Invalid/expired PGP subkeys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver!
=20
"my experience is that as soon as people are old enough to know better,
 they don't know anything at all."
                                                        -- oscar wilde

--jRHKVT23PllUwdXP
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCSUjzIgvIgzMMSnURAlI2AJ9rFeuHWNgoLYDURXY2s7y1MDTjoQCg3gMF
c4k3N0CGQrrcxqLxB12T8KE=
=j6Lr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--jRHKVT23PllUwdXP--