Hi Helmut, Helmut Grohne wrote: > > Introducing this new package is not trivial: It must go through the NEW > > queue and we need to review the other 35 source packages that depend on > > ruby-ronn and maybe switch their dependency over to ronn. Still this > > solution sounds manageable to me. > > It's 38 now. I'll be build-testing and submitting bugs after ruby-ronn > departs from NEW.
I would have been nice if this would have been done in _advance_ instead of getting to hear in a just fixed FTBFS bug report that my package now FTBFS due to today's ruby-ronn upload. (c.f. https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=901567#35; thanks Dmitry for that hint!) IMHO this kind of surging ahead is not different from an uncoordinated library transition. :-/ Regards, Axel -- ,''`. | Axel Beckert <a...@debian.org>, https://people.debian.org/~abe/ : :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin `. `' | 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5 `- | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE
