FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 02-02-2008, 11:27 PM
"Richard Hartmann"
 
Default Proposition: 'NMU' upload of wxwidgets 2.8

This is a copy of what I just sent to the following bugs: #403237,
#415677, #425647, #440330. I wanted to put debian-devel on the CC, but
simply forgot to. Sorry.


Hi all, hi Ron.


I am fully aware that this is not a nice thing to propose and I know
that even though Ron does not know me and probably never even heard of
me, he will dislike me from this point. I would even go as far as to
agreeing to parts of why that is the case. Still, I feel the need to
write this email. Sorry Ron, and I mean that.


The current situation is as follows: A release with a new minor number
has been out for more than a _year_. While the maintainer in question
argues that 2.8 has lots of open bugs, more and more software versions
depend on it. As the maintainer is also unwilling to release another
package with the correct version numbers as pretty much all other
library packages do, this basically means a total standstill. His
implied suggestion to wait for 3.0 does not improve the situation at
all. In fact, it makes it worse. As of right now, this is blocking
#398615, #404319, #411575, #413675, #431435, #444960, #457157.

I do not claim to know what issues are open with 2.8, but I know that
several projects seem to be coping with whatever bugs those might be. I
also know that several maintainers are waiting for the updated packages.
The only option that makes sense to me in such a situation is a NMU-like
action: Package and maintain wxwidgets 2.8 outside of 2.6's maintainers
reach. This is a drastic, probably even hostile thing to do, but, quite
frankly, it seems to be the only option left to everyone involved. Please
note that this is not actually a NMU as it introduces a new package.

I am not a DD and do not think I have the technical skills to maintain
this package, else I would try to do just that. I am confident that
_someone_ among the people affected by this total blockade is able to do
just this.


Last but not least, if 2.8 proves to be too unstable to handle, just
keep it in unstable until after lenny is released. That will at least
allow the other maintainers to go on with their work, even if it does
not make it into the next stable. That will also ease the path for etch
users as backports should pick 2.8 up, as well.


Again, Ron, I can fully understand that you will not be happy about this
email and I am sorry for that. It is just that I do not see any other
option.


Best regards,
Richard Hartmann


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 02-03-2008, 09:28 AM
"Richard Hartmann"
 
Default Proposition: 'NMU' upload of wxwidgets 2.8

On Feb 3, 2008 4:13 AM, Kevin Rosenberg <kevin@rosenberg.net> wrote:

> I see an "other option" and it is straightforward. Do like what was
> done in lenny with wxwidget2.4 and my package ctsim which requires
> wxwidgets 2.4. They were removed from Debian testing and it's not a
> problem. Simply download, compile, and install the library and
> application yourself and don't rely on Debian for your every need.

While that is trivial for one, two or five packages to do, this approach
will, at some point, lead to exactly the mess a packaged distribution
with dependency awareness is meant to avoid.

I do not know why you think your approach is better, safer or more user
friendly than simply typing

apt-get install ctsim

and having both ctsim and a 2.4 version of wxwidgets installed.


Best regards,
Richard


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 02-03-2008, 10:45 AM
Andreas Tille
 
Default Proposition: 'NMU' upload of wxwidgets 2.8

On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, Richard Hartmann wrote:


On Feb 3, 2008 4:13 AM, Kevin Rosenberg <kevin@rosenberg.net> wrote:


I see an "other option" and it is straightforward. Do like what was
done in lenny with wxwidget2.4 and my package ctsim which requires
wxwidgets 2.4. They were removed from Debian testing and it's not a
problem. Simply download, compile, and install the library and
application yourself and don't rely on Debian for your every need.


While that is trivial for one, two or five packages to do, this approach
will, at some point, lead to exactly the mess a packaged distribution
with dependency awareness is meant to avoid.

I do not know why you think your approach is better, safer or more user
friendly than simply typing

apt-get install ctsim

and having both ctsim and a 2.4 version of wxwidgets installed.


I seem to have missed the mail from Kevin but I might wholeheartly
add that this "other option" is something else than Debian. We
provide a system for our users and if we force our users to build
the software we normally provide themselves we just failed. So
I would regard the proposal not as a valid option.

Kind regards

Andreas.

--
http://fam-tille.de


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 02-03-2008, 06:06 PM
Andreas Tille
 
Default Proposition: 'NMU' upload of wxwidgets 2.8

On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, Kevin Rosenberg wrote:


I think that's contention, the difference in opinion between the
package maintainer and some users about what software Debian should
provide.


Well, if we advise users to compile their stuff on their own
something is broken. If we can not provide the latest upstream
version of a certain end user application because we are missing
some underlying libraries (for whatever reason) we IMHO failed
in supporting our users. The user does not care about the underlying
infrastructure but expects us to provide the application he needs.
Our job would be to care for the needed library - if needed by
patching it to become more stable. If this exceeds the timeframe
of a single developer the solution is called group maintenance.

Kind regards

Andreas.

--
http://fam-tille.de


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 02-03-2008, 09:19 PM
Steve Langasek
 
Default Proposition: 'NMU' upload of wxwidgets 2.8

On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 08:06:22PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, Kevin Rosenberg wrote:

>> I think that's contention, the difference in opinion between the
>> package maintainer and some users about what software Debian should
>> provide.

> Well, if we advise users to compile their stuff on their own
> something is broken. If we can not provide the latest upstream
> version of a certain end user application because we are missing
> some underlying libraries (for whatever reason) we IMHO failed
> in supporting our users.

I absolutely do not agree that this is a hard rule. If the libraries are
unsupportable, it is a disservice to our users to pretend that we are
supporting them by including them in a release.

Currently, the packages that are asking for wx2.8 are almost all available
and releasable in earlier versions, built against wx2.6. Uploading wx2.8 to
unstable implies that it's suitable for apps to build against, which by all
accounts it is not.

--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 02-03-2008, 09:30 PM
William Pitcock
 
Default Proposition: 'NMU' upload of wxwidgets 2.8

Hi,

On Sun, 2008-02-03 at 14:19 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 08:06:22PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, Kevin Rosenberg wrote:
>
> >> I think that's contention, the difference in opinion between the
> >> package maintainer and some users about what software Debian should
> >> provide.
>
> > Well, if we advise users to compile their stuff on their own
> > something is broken. If we can not provide the latest upstream
> > version of a certain end user application because we are missing
> > some underlying libraries (for whatever reason) we IMHO failed
> > in supporting our users.
>
> I absolutely do not agree that this is a hard rule. If the libraries are
> unsupportable, it is a disservice to our users to pretend that we are
> supporting them by including them in a release.
>
> Currently, the packages that are asking for wx2.8 are almost all available
> and releasable in earlier versions, built against wx2.6. Uploading wx2.8 to
> unstable implies that it's suitable for apps to build against, which by all
> accounts it is not.

Maybe an upload to experimental would be appropriate then?

William
 
Old 02-04-2008, 07:16 AM
Anthony Towns
 
Default Proposition: 'NMU' upload of wxwidgets 2.8

On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 04:30:09PM -0600, William Pitcock wrote:
> > Currently, the packages that are asking for wx2.8 are almost all available
> > and releasable in earlier versions, built against wx2.6. Uploading wx2.8 to
> > unstable implies that it's suitable for apps to build against, which by all
> > accounts it is not.
> Maybe an upload to experimental would be appropriate then?

Usually.

Cheers,
aj


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 02-04-2008, 09:56 AM
"Richard Hartmann"
 
Default Proposition: 'NMU' upload of wxwidgets 2.8

Hi again,


after some discussion on #debian-devel yesterday, two options were more
or less agreed upon with Ron Lee:

1) People who have an interest in 2.8 contact Ron to work together.

2) People are free to upload 2.8 as a separate package without him
minding the fact that his namespace is impacted, as he does not
currently plan to package 2.8 anyway, preferring to wait for 3.0.


If the package proves to be as unstable as Ron claims it to be, it could
easily remain in experimental, offering the packagers who depend on 2.8
a chance to get their packages into a central place where users who are
aware of the issues can get it from. If it proves to be
stable enough for daily use, but not bug free, it will make it into
unstable, but the bugs will keep it out of testing, anyway. Personally,
I am using Bastian Kleineidam's packages without any problems.


Best regards,
Richard Hartmann


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 02-04-2008, 04:24 PM
Ron
 
Default Proposition: 'NMU' upload of wxwidgets 2.8

> Richard Hartmann writes:
> after some discussion on #debian-devel yesterday, two options were more
> or less agreed upon with Ron Lee:

Richard, please don't profess to speak for me -- especially not couched
in terms such as "more or less". There were several things that people
tried to explain to you in that discussion that you 'more or less'
refused to accept, so please don't muddy the waters further by spreading
more misunderstanding.

> 1) People who have an interest in 2.8 contact Ron to work together.

As we discussed, as I've said previously, and as Myon already announced
once again, lets just start with this step shall we. We can let the
people actually doing the work make judgements on where it will go from
there -- once some work actually gets done and is suitably reviewed.

I don't think many people were in agreement with your proposal that this
should be some sort of open-slather free for all. It is going to take
quite an investment of time and effort for anyone who wants to attempt
this to get (and more importantly, keep) it in a state where it might
become part of the distro.

But anyone who thinks they are up for that, is indeed most welcome to
get in touch with myself and the others who've shown an interest to
date, to co-ordinate what they would like to do and how best to do it.
I don't think having some random number of people acting in isolation
will be sufficient to turn this into something usable. If they exist,
they need to get together and all help each other.

Y'all know where to find us if you feel the itch.

Cheers,
Ron


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 02-04-2008, 05:01 PM
Dirk Eddelbuettel
 
Default Proposition: 'NMU' upload of wxwidgets 2.8

Steve Langasek <vorlon <at> debian.org> writes:
> On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 08:06:22PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > Well, if we advise users to compile their stuff on their own
> > something is broken. If we can not provide the latest upstream
> > version of a certain end user application because we are missing
> > some underlying libraries (for whatever reason) we IMHO failed
> > in supporting our users.

Fully agreed.

> Currently, the packages that are asking for wx2.8 are almost all available
> and releasable in earlier versions, built against wx2.6. Uploading wx2.8 to
> unstable implies that it's suitable for apps to build against, which by all
> accounts it is not.

Wearing a Debian 'user' as well as 'developer' hat, I was stopped in the tracks
a few days ago when I tried to look at some C/c++ IDE (code::blocks) which would
not configure on my testing box due to a lack of wxWidgets 2.8.

Not nice at all. I can typically rely on Debian for having recent and common
software. In this case, Ubuntu won.

Dirk





--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:28 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org