Daniel Leidert wrote: > I vote against this patch. It was planned to coordinate things with > the debhelper maintainer(s) before the final step. If those warnings > are a problem, I'm going to ask for removal of sgml-base from > experimental. There is currently no breakage and (except of those > warnings) also no behaviour change in the SGML/XML core system.
Based on the changelog, it looks like there were a bunch of cleanups in experimental (e.g., using POD to document things)? I am not suffering terribly from the version in experimental, or I would just downgrade. But I do think, if people are not supposed to use this, what was the point of uploading it? Separate from that is that I very much do not want a release of Debian in which many packages produce that warning. One way to avoid that would be 1. Introduce a version in unstable with both update-catalog and update-sgmlcatalog, with neither producing a warning 2. Keep experimental as is (with the warning). 3. Once all packages have been updated (wheezy+1, maybe) and it seems safe to do it, remove update-catalog. Step 1 logically comes before step 2. Another way, for a quicker migration, would be to encourage packages to use update-sgmlcatalog if it is available and fall back to update-catalog. I mention it because that would be a case in which an update-catalog producing a warning on user systems could make sense (to make sure the migration happens quickly). I don't see much point to that and it sounds like you don't like that option either; just mentioning it for completeness. Does that make sense? Is there any way I can help? Regards, Jonathan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org