On 2014-01-29 23:17, Markus Wanner wrote: > Niels, > > On 01/29/2014 08:49 PM, Niels Thykier wrote: >> Adding the maintainer to CC. > > Thanks, very much appreciated. >
You are welcome; I am a bit short on time, so this will be a short answer to a specific issue. >> [...] > > (I'm not sure why simgear2.4.0 is listed as blocking openscenegraph in > the cruft report. I thought that got removed from testing, already?) > It is because simgear2.4.0 remains available in *unstable*, but is not built from the most recent version of the source package. This can happen for multiple reasons - the two most common being FTBFS issues on the listed architectures or transitions where the package has reverse dependencies. Note that both can occur at the same time (for extra confusion). This is an implementation detail of the data Britney has available. She can only see that there is a problem, but not the underlying cause. > [...] > > Yeah, fgrun worries me a bit as I didn't ever use it nor do any > packaging for it. However, with Rebecca Palmer and Saikrishna Arcot, I > got two great helpers. > Oh, sounds good! >> Alternatively, the maintainers of fgrun willing (that would be the >> FlightGear maintainers again), we can ask the FTP masters to decruft >> simgear despite breaking fgrun. This would make fgrun uninstallable in >> sid, but it is already RC buggy and not in testing, so from the RT PoV, >> we don't mind that as a resolution. > > Let me have a look at fgrun, before going that route. I've been focusing > on simgear and flightgear packaging for 3.0.0, first. > Noted. >> This leaves the openscenegraph transition. This is currently waiting >> for choreonoid [mipsel], fgrun (but see above), flightgear [kfreebsd-* >> mips], libcitygml, openwalnut and simgear. Note, the listed packages >> are source packages; the actual problem is one (or more) of the binary >> packages built from said sources. Some of these will probably just need >> a binNMU to finish. > > I'm missing ossim from that list. Hm.. it disappeared from the cruft > report (compared to something a couple of days ago.) > Maybe it got rebuilt against the new version of openscenegraph. But the cruft report is definitely a good source for transitions - kudos for looking at it. :) > [...] > >> This situation will not resolve itself on its own. It needs a "Do'er" >> to get the mess cleaned up > > Agreed. I'm working on it. > Excellent. :) >> [...] > >> If you (maintainer or otherwise) are interested in getting the situation >> resolved, but unsure how to approach it, I don't mind spending an hour >> or two showing you the ropes. > > I'm interested and working on it. My confusion around transitions has > mostly been resolved, already. > Great. :) >> "But I will only show you the door"[1]. > > I already took the red pill. [2] > >> As a member of the Release >> Team, I want to know there is someone taking responsibility for making >> flightgear remain RC bug free, so it is not removed from testing again >> due to inactivity. > > I'll try to keep it RC free - subject to the usual spacetime constraints > of spare-time activities. > Thank you. :) I will have a look at doing the Release Team side of things then. > Regards > > Markus Wanner > > > [...] > > [2]: ...or am I in the wrong movie, now? > > Nope, you aren't. ~Niels -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52e98294.8000...@thykier.net
