On Fri, 30 Dec 2005, Adrian von Bidder wrote: > On Friday 30 December 2005 03.18, Anthony Towns wrote: > > Santiago: > > > As a realistic goal, I estimate that etch will be the last release > > > containing debmake, but of course, I would be deligthed to see it > > > happen sooner. > > > > It would be pretty lame if we couldn't do this in less than a year... > > I suggest release goal: no package in etch to be shipped using debmake, but > I also suggest still shipping a 'final' version of debmake with etch, > containing a big fat warning in its description that its an obsolete > package. Reason: some people may have been doing private packages with > debmake (is this realistic? no idea. If not, forget this.), and this would > probably be the best communication channel to those users. (Yes, we can't > force them to look at the updated package description...)
The reason I've not suggested a release goal is that you would not believe how long it takes sometimes to remove a package from a build-depends, even if that's everything you have to do (see Bug#288797 for example). We already have a lot of things to worry about in etch, and getting rid of debmake is not a super-important item, so there is no hurry. In fact, I would like to see debmake 3.8.2 in a stable release before removing it, as it fixes Bug #270900 (which was not trivial to fix). This is the final release I would like to see in archive.debian.org. Filing wishlist bugs now is an option, provided there is a consensus that 78 wishlist bugs aren't too many bugs :-) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
