Re: Fixing -dev package names in libxcb

[Timo Aaltonen]

On 07.09.2015 07:33, Robert Ancell wrote:
> What exactly was blocked? Was it just because xcb-util was in the NEW
> queue since it added new binary packages?

No it was in proposed, ask doko to be sure (he managed to rebuild them
already when I was just starting) but the migration to main was blocked
because of packages not built against it. A feature of launchpad, AIUI.


-- 
t

Re: Fixing -dev package names in libxcb

[Robert Ancell]

What exactly was blocked? Was it just because xcb-util was in the NEW queue
since it added new binary packages?

On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 12:04 AM Timo Aaltonen  wrote:

> On 12.08.2015 01:13, Robert Ancell wrote:
> > No, the reverse dependencies don't need updating due to the transitional
> > packages. Over time they should be updated but there's no pressure to
> > rush it.
>
> Actually it's not true, the binary dependencies would still be wrong and
> to fix those rebuilds are necessary. That's exactly why xcb-util is
> blocking xorg-server uploads entering wily on ubuntu right now :)
> (because xcb-util hasn't transitioned yet)
>
>
>
> --
> t
>

Re: Fixing -dev package names in libxcb

[Timo Aaltonen]

On 12.08.2015 01:13, Robert Ancell wrote:
> No, the reverse dependencies don't need updating due to the transitional
> packages. Over time they should be updated but there's no pressure to
> rush it.

Actually it's not true, the binary dependencies would still be wrong and
to fix those rebuilds are necessary. That's exactly why xcb-util is
blocking xorg-server uploads entering wily on ubuntu right now :)
(because xcb-util hasn't transitioned yet)



-- 
t

Re: Fixing -dev package names in libxcb

[Timo Aaltonen]

On 01.09.2015 15:04, Timo Aaltonen wrote:
> On 12.08.2015 01:13, Robert Ancell wrote:
>> No, the reverse dependencies don't need updating due to the transitional
>> packages. Over time they should be updated but there's no pressure to
>> rush it.
> 
> Actually it's not true, the binary dependencies would still be wrong and
> to fix those rebuilds are necessary. That's exactly why xcb-util is
> blocking xorg-server uploads entering wily on ubuntu right now :)
> (because xcb-util hasn't transitioned yet)

..and replied to the wrong thread after again confusing two packages..
anyway, xcb-util in ubuntu is now blocking stuff from migrating, needs
rebuilds.

-- 
t

Re: Fixing -dev package names in libxcb

[Robert Ancell]

Hi Julien,

The work is already done in this patch - do you see any ongoing issues?

Reasons I see for doing the renaming:
- It's confusing for users to work out the name of the -dev packages to
install.
- It gives the incorrect impression you can install multiple -dev packages.
- It means each time a library bumps soname then someone has to do a part
of this patch (e.g. as was done for libxcb-sync-dev). Or it gets forgotten.
Or the soname is added to the -dev package requiring a migration and
another the next time it happens.
- It confuses new packagers into thinking they need the soname in the -dev
package.

--Robert

On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 8:26 PM Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org wrote:

 On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 04:14:36 +, Robert Ancell wrote:

  Hi,
 
  I'd like to fix the -dev package names in libxcb - they currently have a
  version number on them which is not correct. The git branch for libxcb
  seems to be owned by collab-maint - should that be changed to pkg-xorg?
 
  I've attached a patch that fixes these package names, please let me know
  how to commit this to an appropriate branch.
 
 I don't think we should change those package names, it's just a bunch of
 work for no benefit IMO.

 Cheers,
 Julien

Re: Fixing -dev package names in libxcb

[Julien Cristau]

On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 04:14:36 +, Robert Ancell wrote:

 Hi,
 
 I'd like to fix the -dev package names in libxcb - they currently have a
 version number on them which is not correct. The git branch for libxcb
 seems to be owned by collab-maint - should that be changed to pkg-xorg?
 
 I've attached a patch that fixes these package names, please let me know
 how to commit this to an appropriate branch.
 
I don't think we should change those package names, it's just a bunch of
work for no benefit IMO.

Cheers,
Julien


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Fixing -dev package names in libxcb

[Julien Cristau]

On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 21:43:39 +, Robert Ancell wrote:

 Hi Julien,
 
 The work is already done in this patch - do you see any ongoing issues?
 
All the reverse dependencies would need changes too.

Cheers,
Julien


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Fixing -dev package names in libxcb

[Robert Ancell]

No, the reverse dependencies don't need updating due to the transitional
packages. Over time they should be updated but there's no pressure to rush
it.

--Robert


On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 10:00 AM Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org wrote:

 On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 21:43:39 +, Robert Ancell wrote:

  Hi Julien,
 
  The work is already done in this patch - do you see any ongoing issues?
 
 All the reverse dependencies would need changes too.

 Cheers,
 Julien