Control: tags -1 moreinfo Carsten Schoenert: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > User: release.debian....@packages.debian.org > Usertags: unblock > > Dear Release Team, > > the current version of KiCad in testing is 4.0.5+dfsg1-4. KiCad is a > Electronic Design Automation tool were people can create electronic > schematics and also can create PCBs later from that. > > It was shown by report #859409 that the recent version in testing > has some none working footprint settings. This makes it hard for not > well experienced user to work around that. > > The reason for this misbehavior is due some restructured footprint > libraries done by upstream in preparation for the release of 4.0.5. > Upstream has mostly renamed some footprints and partially moved some > parts of footprints into other libraries. Upstream has no rule like not > renaming any footprints within one release cycle. > > We can "fix" this mostly by shipping the new footprints and do > symlinking the old names to the new footprints. This is what I have done > in #859409 and the reporter of #859409 has tested some new created > modified packages. > > After the freeze in January upstream also has done a new fixup release, > I prepared and melted this new release also into the packages provided > in #859409. The feedback from the reporter and my local testing of this > packages are positive and functional. > > So I'd like to ask if a upload of kicad package 4.0.6+dfsg1-1 to > unstable is o.k. and if a unblock request after the 10 days is likely to > be accepted? Otherwise we can provide the current version 4.0.6 later by > backports, but I would really like to see a not broken version of KiCad > in Stretch. There are no other packages that depends on any kicad*. > > Please note that I'm not the maintainer of KiCad, this is Georges > Khaznadar. Georges gave me upload rights for kicad some months ago and > I've done most of the packaging work of the last two upstream releases. > Unfortunately Georges is busy and small on time in the past due his day > job. I haven't seen this issue from the report while preparation of > 4.0.5 for unstable as I wasn't aware of all the specific of the > footprint handling at this time. > > Regards > Carsten > > [...]
Hi Carsten, Thanks for the request. It is probably a lot easier for us to judge this given a source debdiff of the actual changes (or two, one for the symlinks and one for the upstream release). Could you perhaps provide such debdiff? Thanks, ~Niels
