-=| marius adrian popa, Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 06:58:08PM +0300 |=- > On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 6:08 PM, Damyan Ivanov <d...@debian.org> wrote: > > I intent to phase firebird2.0 out of the archive. firebird2.5 is > > to be released soon, and having three versions in squeeze is too > > much. Even in 2.5 doesn't make it to squeeze, the current > > recommended version is 2.1, which makes it pointless to support > > for another release cycle. > I agree 2.5 RC1 is on the way and i feel the urge to use it already
Yeah, 2.5 has some niceties I want to try too. The problem is that packages need more work: - [critical] write debian/copyright - test the -superclassic package - put the fbtrace stuff somewhere (different package? -*server packages? is it different when built for classic/super/superclassic?) > I didn't touched firebird 2.0 anymore for years I still use it on servers, where using 'stable' is a priority. This doesn't mean the package can't be dropped from unstable/testing, though, which is exactly what I intent to do. > > Presently, the following packages build-depend on firebird2.0-dev: > > > > - flamerobin (uploaded today with B-D of firebird2.1-dev) > No problem here :) You. Hit the mirrors tonight, so this one is [checked] :) > > - gambas2 > this should be asked on the gambas maintainers but is just an api bump > > - gnugk > don't know here we should ask maintainer > > - python-kinterbasdb > Here anyway the recomended version is the one 3.3.0 from > firebirdsql.org with 2.1 so it's OK to put 2.1 in required > > - qt4-x11 > I only buildeded from source the qt but i use it only with firebird > 2.1 so i vote that it's Ok I still hope to be able to get 2.5 ready for unstable in a reasonable time frame. Changing build-dependencies in four packages can easily take month or two, and making the maintainers do it twice is not very polite. -- dam
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
