Control: tags -1 moreinfo On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 09:56:39 +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Right now he have the following situation ragarding hsqldb in Debian > - "hsqldb" is 1.8.x, long obsolete version but still needed by LO > - hsqldb2.0 in experimental (RM bug #670885 filed, should be removed in > favour of hsqldb2.2) > - hsqldb2.2 in experimental (well, at the time of this writing in NEW) > which is upstreams supported version. > > I'd like to switch that and make hsqldb make build the current one > and build a libhsqldb1.8-java out of a hsqldb1.8. > > In February, I already asked all maintainers of hsqldb-using packages > whether they would be OK[1], so so far, regardless of two pings ([2],[3]) > noone except Andreas Tille for debian-med answered that it would be OK for > him and breakages could be fixed quickly. > > LO will obviously need a source upload to update its (build)-dependends > but otherwise the other packages don't need changes. Unfortunately > the new libhsqldb-java must conflict against libreoffice-base because > of the file format issue... > > Dear RT, can I go on with this transition? > So I didn't see anywhere in this bug report a list of binary packages that go away, and binary packages that replace them, and a description of how we figure out which packages are affected / need a rebuild / need a source upload. What did I miss? Cheers, Julien
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
