Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
On Wed, 2014-01-08 at 22:10 -0500, James McCoy wrote:
> Subversion's transition to the non-versioned ruby-svn package didn't
> make it into Wheezy. Since ruby1.8 is planning on being removed for
> Jessie, the libsvn-ruby1.8 → ruby-svn transition should be backported to
> Wheezy so there's an upgrade path to what will be Jessie's ruby-svn
> (built with something other than ruby1.8) package.
Somehow it seems like if we're renaming binary packages (and introducing
new ones) in stable updates in order to support an upgrade path then
we're doing something wrong. :-|
I must admit I'm slightly unclear regarding the issue with the upgrade
path. Currently upgrading from wheezy to jessie (with {lib,}ruby1.8 held
to approximate a jessie without the packages) leaves one with ruby-svn
and a transitional libsvn-ruby1.8 which pulls in the new package.
Assuming that ruby-svn is updated to contain the bindings for a later
Ruby version, does keeping the transitional package around cause any
issues? I realise it's slightly unclean in that it means installing the
"1.8" package actually pulls in bindings for a later version, but I'm
not currently convinced that doing so is worse than changing the built
packages in a point release.
Regards,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
