Control: tags -1 confirmed
On 24/02/16 11:38, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 06:56:27PM +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>> On 30/01/16 19:18, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
>>> Package: release.debian.org
>>> Severity: normal
>>> User: release.debian....@packages.debian.org
>>> Usertags: transition
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> We want to ship ruby2.3 in stretch, so we must start the transition now.
>>> The Ruby transitions are done in phases, as described in
>>>
>>> https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Ruby/InterpreterTransitions
>>>
>>> We are now in phase 1: I have just uploaded ruby-defaults enabling
>>> builds against ruby2.3 (besides ruby2.2) to experimental, and we will
>>> start test rebuilds ASAP. I am filing this bug now to keep this
>>> transition under the radar of both the Release and Ruby teams.
>>>
>>> Ben file:
>>>
>>> title = "ruby2.3";
>>> is_affected = .depends ~ "libruby2.2" | .depends ~ "libruby2.3";
>>> is_good = .depends ~ "libruby2.3";
>>> is_bad = ! .depends ~ "libruby2.3";
>>>
>>> Note about the ben file statements above: at this stage, packages will
>>> gain ruby2.3 support but won't lose support for ruby2.2, so "bad"
>>> packages are indeed just the ones that don't have ruby2.3 support yet.
>>>
>>> I will let you know when we are ready to begin rebuilds on unstable, but
>>> before even uploading ruby-defaults enabling ruby2.3 builds there.
>>
>> OK.
>>
>> I have created a tracker for you at:
>>
>> https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/ruby2.3.html
>
> I would like to add support for building for ruby2.3 in unstable. That
> means uploading the version of ruby-defaults in experimental to
> unstable.
Let's do that.
> The number of FTBFS in arch:any packages against ruby2.3 support is fairly
> small:
>
> libguestfs
> remctl
> ruby-blockenspiel
> ruby-fssm
> ruby-gsl
> ruby-kakasi-ffi
> ruby-monkey-lib
> ruby-mysql2
> ruby-oj
> ruby-rjb
> ruby-zoom
> zeroc-ice
>
> I'll make sure to report bugs against those packages before uploading
> ruby-defaults. Once ruby-defaults is uploaded, I already have a list of
> packages to binNMU.
Cool.
> Also, could you please drop the "lib" prefixes from the ben file? I
> noted that some packages depend directly on the interpreter packages
> ("rubyX.Y"), so we also need to track those.
Done. Only one package was added though (ruby-standalone).
Emilio
