>>>>> "Nikolaus" == Nikolaus Rath <nikol...@rath.org> writes:
Nikolaus> I agree. There shouldn't have been an s3ql package in
Nikolaus> Wheezy. This was when I was young and inexperienced with
Nikolaus> Debian packaging. However, the situation is different for
Nikolaus> Jessie. Now that it is much more mature, there will be
Nikolaus> issues in keeping the stretch S3QL fully backwards
Nikolaus> compatible with Jessie S3QL.
I don't understand.
do you mean perhaps no issues or a managable number of issues or
something like that?
>> So, you talked about it being a lot of work to do the upgrade in
>> one step. Why does that need to happen? Why can't the upgrade
>> be handled in two steps and we just package the necessary parts
>> to do all the steps?
Nikolaus> That would mean to package ~5 intermediate S3QL
Nikolaus> versions. Not a big deal in terms of work (since these
Nikolaus> versions were already in testing at some point), but do
Nikolaus> you think that would be acceptable for a point release?
>> How much harder are we talking about than getting the s3qladm and
>> s3ql libraries from the 2.5 version of s3ql into Jessie?
Nikolaus> I don't understand the question.
Ah.
Looking at the debian news file, the only announced upgrade is at
version 2.5 between 1.11 and 2.11.1.
So, for example, I've installed s3ql 2.7-1 on a jessie system and it
seems happy to upgrade my wheezy filesystem. (Note that some of the
tests failed during the build of 2.7-1 on Jessie I had to build with
DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nocheck, so some work is required)
It sounds like you believe that many intermediate versions are required.
What am I missing? It looks to me like only one intermediate version is
needed. Can we get that into Jessie? I don't know, but I'd be happy to
talk to the release team and make my best argument for it.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
