On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 11:13:08 +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 03:33:42PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > > Hi Bill, > > > > On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 18:08:21 +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > > > > > Dear release team, > > > > > > I would like to proceed with the libjpeg8 transition. What are your plan ? > > > > > #547393 is marked as blocked by a number of other bugs. Can you check > > with the maintainers of the affected packages? > > I could, but consider that: > #592925 is fixed, #582417 is not really a bug and the others seems to have > unresponsive maintainers, it looks like a loss of time.
They'll still need to be fixed when we make the switch, since some of them are libraries with a non-trivial number of reverse dependencies. Of course one option could be to make them build-depend on libjpeg62-dev, but if the maintainers are unresponsive you should be prepared to NMU. > What is more problematic is the numbers of packages that embed a copy of > libjpeg6b, > but this is mostly na independant issue. > Let's keep this separate. Cheers, Julien -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org