Re: Bug#404888: glib destabilization and ways forward

2006-12-30 Thread Thomas Bushnell BSG
On Sat, 2006-12-30 at 17:15 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le vendredi 29 décembre 2006 à 10:48 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG a > écrit : > > Despite what Josselin has said, I can see no indication from a brief > > perusal of the upstream branch sources in trac that upstream gnucash > > either no lo

Re: Bug#404888: glib destabilization and ways forward

2006-12-30 Thread Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt
Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Le vendredi 29 décembre 2006 à 10:48 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG a écrit : >> 1) Decide that glib should not migrate into testing (it is a freeze, >> after all); if there are particular fixes of RC issues in more recent >> versions, then those fixes sho

Re: glib destabilization and ways forward

2006-12-30 Thread Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, 2006-12-29 at 12:56 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 08:11:14PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote: >>> I miss an analysis of what other packages are involved in this plan. If >>> only GnuCash is involved that'd make the lower ra

Re: Bug#404888: glib destabilization and ways forward

2006-12-30 Thread Josselin Mouette
Le vendredi 29 décembre 2006 à 10:48 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG a écrit : > Despite what Josselin has said, I can see no indication from a brief > perusal of the upstream branch sources in trac that upstream gnucash > either no longer uses these key files or has changed away from the keys > with em

Re: glib destabilization and ways forward

2006-12-29 Thread Thomas Bushnell BSG
On Fri, 2006-12-29 at 12:56 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 08:11:14PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote: > > On Friday 29 December 2006 19:48, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > > Note that option (3) depends on upstream's ability to fix the problem > > > quickly, *and* is likely to be err

Re: glib destabilization and ways forward

2006-12-29 Thread Steve Langasek
On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 08:11:14PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote: > On Friday 29 December 2006 19:48, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > Note that option (3) depends on upstream's ability to fix the problem > > quickly, *and* is likely to be error prone. If our priority is the > > *release*, then options (1)

Re: glib destabilization and ways forward

2006-12-29 Thread Otavio Salvador
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, 2006-12-29 at 17:13 -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote: >> >> Well, bugs are bugs and I don't think we should be too hard on this. I >> think that changes that does change the library behaviour should be >> avoided. > > The rules for a freeze ar

Re: glib destabilization and ways forward

2006-12-29 Thread Thomas Bushnell BSG
On Fri, 2006-12-29 at 17:13 -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote: > > Well, bugs are bugs and I don't think we should be too hard on this. I > think that changes that does change the library behaviour should be > avoided. The rules for a freeze are that changes which fix release critical bugs are transit

Re: glib destabilization and ways forward

2006-12-29 Thread Thomas Bushnell BSG
On Fri, 2006-12-29 at 20:11 +0100, Frans Pop wrote: > On Friday 29 December 2006 19:48, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > Note that option (3) depends on upstream's ability to fix the problem > > quickly, *and* is likely to be error prone. If our priority is the > > *release*, then options (1) and (2

Re: glib destabilization and ways forward

2006-12-29 Thread Otavio Salvador
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, 2006-12-29 at 17:02 -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote: >> Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> > 2) Decide that glib can migrate into testing, with the particular change >> > of checking key values reverted to its pre-2.12.5 be

Re: glib destabilization and ways forward

2006-12-29 Thread Frans Pop
On Friday 29 December 2006 19:48, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Note that option (3) depends on upstream's ability to fix the problem > quickly, *and* is likely to be error prone. If our priority is the > *release*, then options (1) and (2) are the best choices. I miss an analysis of what other pa

Re: glib destabilization and ways forward

2006-12-29 Thread Thomas Bushnell BSG
On Fri, 2006-12-29 at 17:02 -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote: > Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > 2) Decide that glib can migrate into testing, with the particular change > > of checking key values reverted to its pre-2.12.5 behavior, since this > > is a destabilizing change in the

Re: glib destabilization and ways forward

2006-12-29 Thread Otavio Salvador
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 2) Decide that glib can migrate into testing, with the particular change > of checking key values reverted to its pre-2.12.5 behavior, since this > is a destabilizing change in the Debian context. This looks to be the best option since it preserve

glib destabilization and ways forward

2006-12-29 Thread Thomas Bushnell BSG
Despite what Josselin has said, I can see no indication from a brief perusal of the upstream branch sources in trac that upstream gnucash either no longer uses these key files or has changed away from the keys with embedded spaces. I have asked gnucash upstream for their thoughts on the long-term