Re: propose: provide "docker" package as docker, not wmdocker
Hideki Yamane writes ("propose: provide "docker" package as docker, not
wmdocker"):
> I'd like to propose wmdocker package would rename its source
> package from docker to wmdocker, and then docker.io package
> provides docker binary package and transitional docker.io package.
Do we have a wiki page which gives a procedure for renaming a source
package ?
Source package renames are rather disruptive because we key a lot of
stuff off the source package name. At least bugs need to be
reorganised, and possibly other things. To reuse a source package
name and then upload the new package with dgit, it's necessary to ask
a dgit repo admin to do special by hand adjustments. etc.
This all seems like it could do with a checklist that we can at least
add things to each time we discover a brokenness we should have
avoided...
Ian.
--
Ian JacksonThese opinions are my own.
Pronouns: they/he. If I emailed you from @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk,
that is a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
Re: propose: provide "docker" package as docker, not wmdocker
Gioele Barabucci wrote: > On 05/12/22 18:19, Andreas Metzler wrote: >> how do you avoid that people who still have got the transitional docker >> (--> wmdocker) package installed end up being upgraded to real docker >> (from docker.io)? > How was the transition from git-the-file-viewer to git-the-VCS handled > in lenny/squeeze? Afaict (Thanks, Gerrit for linking the discussion in git's debian/changelog) it was also discussed on debian-devel before making the switch. However no real solution came up and it was deemed to be acceptable to have some unwanted git (VCS) installations. cu Andreas -- `What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are so grateful to you.' `I sew his ears on from time to time, sure'
Re: propose: provide "docker" package as docker, not wmdocker
On 05/12/22 18:19, Andreas Metzler wrote: how do you avoid that people who still have got the transitional docker (--> wmdocker) package installed end up being upgraded to real docker (from docker.io)? How was the transition from git-the-file-viewer to git-the-VCS handled in lenny/squeeze? Regards, -- Gioele Barabucci
Re: propose: provide "docker" package as docker, not wmdocker
On Mon, 05 Dec 2022 at 18:19:16 +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote: > how do you avoid that people who still have got the transitional docker > (--> wmdocker) package installed end up being upgraded to real docker > (from docker.io)? One option (although I hope someone has a better suggestion) would be to release Debian 12 with no docker package at all (neither wmdocker nor docker.io), hope that users have cleaned up obsolete packages after the Debian 12 upgrade as recommended in https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/amd64/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html#obsolete, and then release Debian 13 with a docker packge that is the container framework. smcv
Re: propose: provide "docker" package as docker, not wmdocker
On 2022-12-04 Hideki Yamane wrote: > Hi, > I'd like to propose wmdocker package would rename its source package > from docker to wmdocker, and then docker.io package provides docker > binary package and transitional docker.io package. > Most of users who is not Debian expert still confusing with docker > package, so I want to fix it in Debian12 "bookworm". > wmdocker and transitional dummy docker package is already in Debian10 > "buster", so it does not confuse users and also other packages as > well. > Any thoughts? > If there's no objections against it, I'll file a bug and upload > renamed source package for wmdocker (maybe with some more updates to > comply with current Standards-version) first. Hello, how do you avoid that people who still have got the transitional docker (--> wmdocker) package installed end up being upgraded to real docker (from docker.io)? cu Andreas -- `What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are so grateful to you.' `I sew his ears on from time to time, sure'
