* Luk Claes ([email protected]) [100201 19:06]: > Jan Wagner wrote: > > On Saturday 30 January 2010 14:47:34 Mehdi Dogguy wrote: > > >> We already provide correct build-dependencies. Here, the only missing > >> thing is that our dh_ocaml uses features from debhleper 7.1.0. The > >> package dh-ocaml do not contain only the dh_ocaml script and ocaml > >> sequence, but also some other dev-tools. I see two solutions: > >> > >> - Make dh-ocaml depend on debhelper >= 7.1.0 (the exact version that > >> introduced the desired feature). But, I'm not really convinced that this > >> is the right solution because we may use all what dh-ocaml ships but > >> dh_ocaml. > >> > >> - Make dh-ocaml conflicts with debhelper << 7.1.0. But this solution > >> seems also wrong for the same reason I mentioned before. > > > > Sorry, I strongly disagree. I don't see any reason to not provide the > > correct > > versioned build-dep. You package is failing to build from source, if you > > need > > special versions of a package, you have to provide a correct control file. > > A versioned build dependency might be needed for backports, but is > definitely not needed for packages in unstable/testing/stable.
We had a few discussions about that on IRC. I read this as "we don't qualify a missing version on the build-dependency as release critical (as long as building the packages on the (unstable) autobuilders doesn't fail)", which is obviously correct. I however think that nevertheless it would be nice and helpful for the backporters if a versioned build dependency would be set. If not, this package still qualifies to be released with squeeze (that is what "not release critical" means by definition). Cheers, Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
