Proposal mass bug filling on packages depending on xlibs(?)

[Stephan Hermann]

Good Morning,

On Sunday 31 July 2005 23:51, Ondrej Sury wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-07-31 at 15:55 -0500, Ming Hua wrote:
> > So would you please elaborate what you mean by "but it seems that
> > depending on '| xlibs (>> 4.1.0)' will be wrong for Breezy anyway"?
>
> Well, it seems useless to depend on transitional package, isn't it?
> My opinion is that Daniel should change shlibs to not include xlibs, so
> newly compiled package won't depend on xlibs (transitional package).
> I think that there is still plenty of time for Breezy, but dropping
> xlibs can be done for Breezy+1 as well.  (That's not up to me to
> decide :-).

Another transition on the list of TODOs for MOTU.
You are free to join the MOTU Team...to change all deps from xlibs to libx* we 
need any helping hand we can get.

I think, after Daniel is finished with Xorg, it should be easier to leave this 
for breezy+1. I hope Debian is going also the Xorg way and is using Daniels 
Xorg packages.
So, after breezy release, we can easily sync it from Debian.

But right now, 2005-08-11 is standing in front of our door...and we should 
take this time until release, to polish most of the apps to run properly, to 
have proper .desktop files etc. pp. instead of punishing the buildds with 
recompilation of all packages with xlibs deps.

And Daniels attempt to reintroduce those backward compatiblity is a better 
approach then recompiling anyways.

Regards,

\sh
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20050801/4ea7c668/attachment.pgp