Hello Release Managers. This is in reply to Andreas's comment on irc where vorlon mentioned the mldonkey RC bug.
Given Sylvain's comment that mldonkey should not be in testing, i think this is a green light to go ahead, i will scan the weekly RC bug list for other issues though. On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 08:06:40AM +0100, Sylvain LE GALL wrote: > Sven wrote : > > > > Sylvain, i feel bad about this whole mldonkey mess, we should have noticed > > earlier and helped you out on this, we do quite a bad job as sponsors or > > mentors or whatever on this account. > > > > I have (quickly) read both RC bug reports, and it is quite murky. I am not > > fully sure of how things are, but i would say : > > > > 1) chose a mldonkey group and user, and have it created and make sure it > > works with it. If somebody has already a mldonkey user, output a note to > > the > > user telling him to remove it or whatever. (or a more helpfull selection > > as > > posted in the bug report). > > > > 2) make sure all files get created. /var/cache/mldonkey would maybe be a > > better default than /var/lib/mldonkey. > > > > 3) if removing the file as conffile does the job, then let's do it. more > > to > > this below. > > > > 4) take advantage of debconf's priority levels to ask at high (the > > default) > > priority only the minimum set of questions, and go into more details at > > level medium or low. > > > > as for ucf/conffiles issue, i am not sure. > > > > Could you patch mldonkey to look at /usr/share/mldonkey for its config file > > as > > well as /etc/mldonkey ? Making /etc/mldonkey the default, maybe overriding > > individual values from the share version ? > > > > This way you would ship a commented out /etc/mldonkey config file as > > conffile, > > have a big warning about the ucf handling, and that users should really use > > dpkg-reconfigure to handle the file, but still give them power to override > > this. > > > > Let's fix this as soon as possible, and let's go to #debian-ocaml-maint this > > evening if needed to work those issues out if possible. > > > > A quick note to the reporters of this bug, well as i read this bug report > > the > > first time, i found that the first reporting of the bugs where a wee bit too > > agressive, especially coming from a debian developer. But let's hope we can > > fix things in a fashion agreable to all now. > > > > I have no time to answer you completely ( i will be late for my job ). Ok, let's speak later. > In two word : mldonkey is not in testing, it is only in unstable. I made > it on purpose, i am not happy with the package and the actual version > doesn't work well with a lot of server. > > I will upload a revised package in one or two week, but i don't want it > into sarge. Ok. > I am suprised that a debian package only in unstable could made so much > noise. Because many people use it, and i think it will be sorely missing in sarge, but you know best. > I will answer longer tonight. Ok, basically, if the RMs confirm this, we will go ahead with a staged upload. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
