On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 02:02:49PM +0100, Alastair McKinstry wrote: > I think there is a misunderstanding (although on whose part i'm not > sure). I set 791114 to important to prevent libdap from transitioning to > testing before being rebuilt with gcc5.
Several on your part, unfortunately: - the bug is against release.debian.org, so it doesn't affect libdap - severity:important is not RC, so it doesn't affect migrations - transition bugs are only severity:normal other than in exceptional circumstances, and the release team decide those > libdap is a c++ library with c++11 ABI changes, with a SONAME change in > this version (3.12.0 -> 3.14.0). > If it transitions now, a second transition with new ugly v5 names will > be needed for gcc5, which I wish to avoid. s/transitions/migrates/ ? Since it already migrated, your options include putting up with the second transition, or removing gdal and its reverse dependencies from testing. > Whats the optimal procedure for this? Next time? File an RC bug against the right package to hold up the migration. However, we'd generally prefer you didn't do that, since outstanding transitions cost us time and effort. -- Jonathan Wiltshire j...@debian.org Debian Developer http://people.debian.org/~jmw 4096R: 0xD3524C51 / 0A55 B7C5 1223 3942 86EC 74C3 5394 479D D352 4C51
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
