bzr 2.2 has gone gold

[Jelmer Vernooij]

On Thu, 2010-08-19 at 16:12 +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
> On 17 August 2010 20:05, Gary van der Merwe <garyvdm at gmail.com> wrote:
> > We need to not make the same mistakes that we have made in the past.
> > This means we need to get all packages it the ppa updated, so that when
> > the user upgrades, they don't get broken plugins. We should first update
> > the beta ppa, and once we have gotten all packages upgraded, then copy
> > them to the main ppa.
> >
> > I think we should try divide up the work. Here are a list of packages in
> > the ppa. Add your name if you can do them.
> >
> > bzr              - Martin Pool
> 
> This is now done, and tested across hardy, jaunty, karmic and lucid,
> and 2.2.0 is already in maverick.
> 
> > python-testtools -
> 
> lifeless has done this on all platforms but not lucid or maverick; I
> will try just porting it forward.
> 
> > bzrtools         -
> > bzr-rebase       -
> > bzr-builddeb     -
> > bzr-loom         -
> > bzr-pipeline     -
> >
> > loggerhead       -
> >
> > dulwich          -
> > bzr-git          -
> > subvertpy        -
> > bzr-svn          -
> 
> I see in <https://edge.launchpad.net/~bzr/+archive/proposed/+packages>
> there's now a bzr-svn 1.0.3 that works with 2.2.0, but only built for
> lucid.  Our PPA has only 0.6.9 of subvertpy; I don't know what bzr-svn
> needs (it declares it needs only 0.6.1) but I suspect it wants
> something newer, like the 0.7.3 in maverick?
It will still work with older versions of subvertpy, all the way back to
0.6.1. bzr-svn either has replacement functions for new functions in
subvertpy introduced since then or doesn't use them. There are some
memory leak and crash fixes that might be useful though, but it
shouldn't be a strict requirement.

Cheers,

Jelmer