On 2015-08-01 22:09, Scott Kitterman wrote:
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian....@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
I noticed that sqlalchemy is not transitioning to testing because a
number of
depending packages need to be rebuilt. I've gotten a bit lost trying
to
figure out exactly which packages are left to do, so I'd appreciate it
if
you could set up a transition tracker to facilitate getting this done.
Below is my likely not so great attempt at a Ben file. Fundamentally,
a
'good' package will Depend: python-sqlalchemy (>= 1.0~),
python-sqlalchemy
(<< 1.1) and a 'bad' package will have a max version something less
than 1.0.
Ben file:
title = "python-sqlalchemy";
is_affected = .depends ~ "python-sqlalchemy" ;
is_good = .depends ~ "python-sqlalchemy (<< 1.1)";
is_bad = .depends ~ "python-sqlalchemy (<< 0.9)" | .depends ~
"python-sqlalchemy (<< 0.10)";
I tried a few variations, but I found that some packages don't express
version constraints on python-sqlalchemy so they show up unknown. I
eventually settled on this:
title = "sqlalchemy";
is_affected = .depends ~ /python3?-sqlalchemy/;
is_good = .depends ~ /python3?-sqlalchemy/;
is_bad = .depends ~ /python3?-sqlalchemy \(<< 0/;
It relies on bad taking precedence over good, and seems to come up with
a sensible result (from what I spot-checked). How does it look to you?
https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/sqlalchemy.html
--
Jonathan Wiltshire j...@debian.org
Debian Developer http://people.debian.org/~jmw
4096R: 0xD3524C51 / 0A55 B7C5 1223 3942 86EC 74C3 5394 479D D352 4C51
<directhex> i have six years of solaris sysadmin experience, from
8->10. i am well qualified to say it is made from bonghits
layered on top of bonghits
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
