On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 10:44:00AM -0400, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote: > On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 8:13 AM, Lucas Nussbaum <lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net> > wrote: > > On 06/08/10 at 07:55 -0400, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote: > >> According to > >> https://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=sagemath;ver=3.0.5dfsg-5.1;arch=alpha;stamp=1263382158 > >> the build of sagemath 3.0.5dfsg-5.1 failed due to a missing dependency on > >> libiml-dev . This package is now available. Could someone please reschedule > >> a build on alpha for sagemath? > > > > That's probably not necessary, as the removal of sagemath has been > > requested (#573538). > > > > - Lucas > > > > Hi Lucas, > > I am interested in seeing sagemath in Debian. I'd like to package it > for Debian with the help of others (of course). I am also willing to > spend time, maintain and collaborate with upstream. Based on the > discussions in bug:573538 there are many others who are interested to > help get sagemath into Debian. > > Here is my approach. It is based on the discussions from debconf10 > talks yesterday. > > 3) Next, I want to go step by step from 3.0.5dfsg-5.1 all the way upto > 4.5.1. So, I want to work on packaging 3.0.6 instead of 4.5.1 . Sure, > the upstream may not like it. But this way we will have a solid > understanding of what actually are the dependencies on the package.
Kamaraju, Overall I like your plan. And I'd like to help. I do not like starting with version 3.0.6. I think such an old version is unlikely to attract many users and hence testing will be suboptimal. In addition, upstream reports that upgrading to 4.5 is currently broken (http://sagemath.org/mirror/src/changelogs/sage-4.5.1.txt), so we know that older releases will incur substantial development challenges that even upstream is not supporting. Moreover, upstream releases very frequently (lately releases have occurred more often than once per month), so by the end of the squeeze+1 cycle we will experience many, many upgrade tests. So adding to the testing burden by doing a "dry run" with legacy versions seems to me to be a very inefficient use of volunteer time. Indeed, until the packaging process becomes very efficient (which might take substantial time), I think it would be smarter to conserve limited volunteer resources by not packaging some of the upstream releases. So I think we should start with version 4.5.1 (or even version 4.5.2 if it comes out before our planning and team organizing work is done). Note: I dropped debian-rele...@lists.debian.org and ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org from the CC: list as we are moving away from their areas of concern. -- We are on a spaceship; a beautiful one. It took billions of years to develop. We're not going to get another. Now, how do we make this spaceship work? -- Buckminster Fuller CJ Fearnley | Explorer in Universe c...@cjfearnley.com | Design Science Revolutionary http://www.CJFearnley.com | "Dare to be Naive" -- Bucky Fuller -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
