Re: transition: liblo

[Jaromír Mikeš]

> Od: Felipe Sateler <fsateler at gmail.com>

FS > Package: release.debian.org
FS > Severity: normal
FS > User: release.debian.org at packages.debian.org
FS > Usertags: transition
   
FS > New upstream liblo bumps SONAME, so we need to transition. Also, we take
FS > this opportunity to change the -dev package name to unversion it.
FS > liblo-dev now provides liblo0-dev to avoid breaking too many packages.
FS > However, rosegarden and sineshaper have versioned build-dependencies on
FS > liblo0-dev. They both require versions already in oldstable, so a simple
FS > NMU dropping the versioning is enough for them. All other packages
FS > should require binNMUs, and the new version is supposed to be
FS > API-compatible with the old one.
  
JM > Hi Felipe,
  
JM > sorry for newbie like question I don't understand how this process should be
JM > done.
JM > Can I help with it somehow?
JM > btw lv2fil and zynjacku package I would like get uploaded will take advantage
JM > from new liblo version.
  
 
FS> Basically, we are waiting for the release team's approval to upload the
FS> new version to unstable. Because there cannot be any packages that are
FS> not built by any source, the new liblo (package name liblo7) cannot
FS> migrate into testing until all the applications that use liblo
FS> (depending on package liblo0ldbl) are ready to migrate too, so that the
FS> old liblo package can be removed at the same time. This process gets
FS> complicated if several libraries are transitioning, since they may get
FS> entangled.
 
JM> > This mean change build dependency in control file from "liblo0-dev"  to
JM> "liblo0-dev (>= 0.26)" and re-upload all packages just after new liblo will move
JM> to sid?

FS> Actually, the name changed from liblo0-dev to liblo-dev (to avoid these
FS> name changes in the future). So if you _need_ the newer liblo,
FS> build-depend on liblo-dev. If not, use liblo-dev | liblo0-dev.

Thanks that explaining all for me

regards

mira