Your message dated Fri, 10 Dec 2010 00:41:08 +0100
with message-id <87bp4utsyz....@gismo.pca.it>
and subject line Re: chef: remove from squeeze because of solr (#602697)? (was
Re: Bug#602697: chef-solr depends on solr)
has caused the Debian Bug report #605277,
regarding chef: remove from squeeze because of solr (#602697)?
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
605277: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=605277
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: solr
Severity: serious
Tags: squeeze
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
I've written a mail ("Remove Solr from Squeeze?") on 2010/10/12 to
debian-java and the package's maintainer Jan-Pascal van Best and
proposed the removal of solr from Squeeze, mainly because:
- - it's already outdated a year by now (see bug #602696 )
- - it doesn't even include all contribs (see bug #602695 )
- - the package has accumulated too many bugs
- - there doesn't seem to be enough (wo)man power to maintain the package
right now on a standard that would make it fit for Debian _stable_
So until nothing else happens, please don't include solr in Debian
squeeze.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)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=TqjB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Package: chef
Version: 0.8.16-4.2
Hi there!
Adding debian-release@ to the cc: given that this is (no more) an RC
bug, please read the background in the BTS.
On Sun, 28 Nov 2010 17:47:41 +0100, Luca Capello wrote:
> Cc:ing all the people that have interacted with this bug.
Done again, please forgive me if you are no more interested in it.
> On Sun, 07 Nov 2010 14:52:24 +0100, Thomas Koch wrote:
>> Adam D. Barratt:
>>> On Sun, 2010-11-07 at 11:38 +0100, Thomas Koch wrote:
>>> > So until nothing else happens, please don't include solr in Debian
>>> > squeeze.
>>>
>>> The package has a reverse-dependency in testing already, so can't be
>>> removed right now:
>>>
>>> Checking reverse dependencies...
>>> # Broken Depends:
>>> chef: chef-solr
>>
>> to the maintainer of Chef in Debian,
>>
>> this is just to inform you, that there is a recommendation from me to remove
>> the solr package from Debian. However since chef-solr does depend on solr,
>> you'd affected by this removal.
>
> Some hints about the chef package in Debian:
>
> - Debian has (6-month-old) 0.8.16-4.1, while upstream is at 0.9.12
> - popcon show 41 installation (2 recent) for the chef binary package and
> 2 (0 recent) for the chef-solr binary package
> - there is an RC bug for chef-solr (#604231, installation fails because
> of nodedown)
>
> Thus, I think the best thing would be to remove chef from squeeze (new
> bugs created), so then we can remove solr as well.
No need anymore to remove chef from squeeze, given that after its
maintainer hint I uploaded the 0.8.16-4.2 NMU which removes any -server*
and -solr package.
This is the reason why I closed this bug with the NMU version.
>>> It's also in lenny (albeit in contrib) so if it were removed then a
>>> migration path for those users to a replacement would be good.
>
> Given that chef-solr was not in lenny, the above applies to solr only.
> However, I should say that I do not know at all a good migration path.
This still stands, but I am no solr expert, sorry.
Thx, bye,
Gismo / Luca
pgpsHRzkhLWrt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--- End Message ---
