Re-establishing FFmpeg package naming consistency and transition woes

Steve Langasek steve.langasek at
Tue Aug 25 02:15:16 BST 2009

On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 09:59:36AM +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote:

> > This will disrupt continuity for Launchpad bug tracking, as well as in
> > other cases (SRUs, security updates?).  I think the proposed binary
> > package renames are reasonable, but I think the source package names
> > should remain unchanged.

> In effect, this changes is a revert, the source package was named
> 'ffmpeg' in hardy, our last LTS, which would leave us with 2 releases
> (intrepid and jaunty) with that 'funny' discontinuity.

Ah - damned if we do, damned if we don't, then.  I withdraw my objection.

> Regarding bug tracking, I've had the experience that the source package
> name 'ffmpeg-debian' is not intutive at all, and people just file bugs
> against 'ffmpeg'. Not reverting this rename will not stop them to do so,
> since the old entry 'ffmpeg' will not go away for earlier releases of
> this package.


 - users ought to use apport to file bug reports, which would catch this
 - I think LP should disallow filing bug reports against the default
   distribution for packages that aren't present in that distribution.

But those are both long-term things, I guess. :)

> Is there anything I need to do to get the 'ffmpeg' package promoted to
> 'main' or is this discussion the blocker for its promotion?

That will be cleaned up via components-mismatches as usual.

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                          
slangasek at                                     vorlon at
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : 

More information about the ubuntu-devel mailing list