On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 08:02:38AM +0100, Niels Thykier wrote:
> I am afraid I do not see how removing libjpeg9 from testing is
> inconsistent with the tech-ctte decision.
You need to reread the full decision in context.
> The very first item of their
> resolution text states that:
>
> 1. [...] The release team does not want to have more than one libjpeg
> implementation.
This is in the Whereas part, not in the Therefore. Thus this is what the
release team want, but not necessarily what the TC has decided.
> Then further down, they follow up with:
>
> 10. The Technical Committee resolves that libjpeg-turbo should
> become the libjpeg implementation in Debian, [...]
And this is the case now. However the TC did not say all other libjpeg
implementations need to be removed from testing.
Indeed wheezy includes both libjpeg6b and libjpeg8 so there is a
precedent for that. At the very least it is customary to provide old
libraries in the next release as part of the oldlibs section.
Then the TC gives a detailed view fo what should happens:
12. Implementing the decision in 10 above will require removing
"Provides: libjpeg-dev" from libjpeg8, since such a virtual
package must be provided by only one real package at a time.
Therefore the Provides should be removed from the libjpeg8
package - in accordance with the transition plan -
notwithstanding the libjpeg8 maintainer's preference that
libjpeg8 should remain as the default libjpeg. This change
should be made by the libjpeg8 maintainer; if the change is not
made within a reasonable time it should be done in an NMU by the
libjpeg-turbo maintainer.
This is an unambiguous statement that they only intent the "Provides:
libjpeg-dev" of libjpeg8 to be removed and not the whole package, otherwise
they would have stated it directly (in particular since removing libjpeg8
automatically remove the Provides making it a non-issue).
The text shows they anticipate the existence of multiple 'real libjpeg*-dev
packages' but only one providing libjpeg-dev.
And in any case, the release team never communicated to me their intent to
remove libjpeg6b, libjpeg8 and libjpeg9 from jessie. I only learned about
it in January from the archive notification. And so far no rationale has been
given.
Cheers,
--
Bill. <ballo...@debian.org>
Imagine a large red swirl here.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
