Your message dated Sat, 24 May 2025 19:30:47 +0200
with message-id <adicr6njwzcwb...@ramacher.at>
and subject line Re: Bug#1106409: unblock: magics++/4.16.0-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #1106409,
regarding unblock: magics++/4.16.0-1
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
1106409: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1106409
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
X-Debbugs-Cc: magic...@packages.debian.org
Control: affects -1 + src:magics++
User: release.debian....@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock package magics++
[ Reason ]
I'm not sure why magics++ wasn't ready to migrate before.
It was uploaded in April but never built until yesterday. I guess it
was waiting for a dependency to get fixed, which has only just been
fixed.
magics++ doesn't have debian/tests, so needs a manual unblock to
proceed into trixie.
[ Impact ]
The block on magics++ is threatening removal of sasview (and metview)
from trixie, which would be regrettable.
[ Tests ]
magics++ does not have debian/tests, unfortunately, which is why this
manual unblock is needed.
[ Risks ]
Low risks in the sense that magics++ is only used by a small handful
of packages (metview, sasview in some way)
[ Checklist ]
[ ] all changes are documented in the d/changelog
Documented as "New upstream release".
[ ] I reviewed all changes and I approve them
No, this is not "my" package. I'm just trying to prevent removal of sasview.
[ ] attach debdiff against the package in testing
magics++/4.16.0 is a new upstream release that should have been
built in April before hard freeze. Upstream source contains data
files, making it impractical to make a debdiff.
[ Other info ]
I don't have a direct interest in magics++, I'm just trying to prevent
removal of sasview. For what's it's worth, I cannot see why magics++
removal is threatening sasview removal. I can't see a direct
dependency.
unblock magics++/4.16.0-1
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 2025-05-24 15:58:02 +0200, Drew Parsons wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> X-Debbugs-Cc: magic...@packages.debian.org
> Control: affects -1 + src:magics++
> User: release.debian....@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: unblock
>
> Please unblock package magics++
>
> [ Reason ]
>
> I'm not sure why magics++ wasn't ready to migrate before.
> It was uploaded in April but never built until yesterday. I guess it
> was waiting for a dependency to get fixed, which has only just been
> fixed.
>
> magics++ doesn't have debian/tests, so needs a manual unblock to
> proceed into trixie.
>
>
> [ Impact ]
>
> The block on magics++ is threatening removal of sasview (and metview)
> from trixie, which would be regrettable.
>
> [ Tests ]
>
> magics++ does not have debian/tests, unfortunately, which is why this
> manual unblock is needed.
>
>
> [ Risks ]
>
> Low risks in the sense that magics++ is only used by a small handful
> of packages (metview, sasview in some way)
>
>
> [ Checklist ]
> [ ] all changes are documented in the d/changelog
> Documented as "New upstream release".
> [ ] I reviewed all changes and I approve them
> No, this is not "my" package. I'm just trying to prevent removal of sasview.
> [ ] attach debdiff against the package in testing
> magics++/4.16.0 is a new upstream release that should have been
> built in April before hard freeze. Upstream source contains data
> files, making it impractical to make a debdiff.
With "978 files changed, 431012 insertions(+), 18227 deletions(-)" this
is impossible for us to review. I am afraid that it is too late for this
new upstream release (and it would also not have qualified as targetted
fix during soft freeze). Closing
Cheers
>
> [ Other info ]
>
> I don't have a direct interest in magics++, I'm just trying to prevent
> removal of sasview. For what's it's worth, I cannot see why magics++
> removal is threatening sasview removal. I can't see a direct
> dependency.
>
> unblock magics++/4.16.0-1
>
--
Sebastian Ramacher
--- End Message ---
