Frescobaldi package broken in Jammy

[Steve Langasek]

On Sun, Oct 23, 2022 at 01:59:01PM +0200, Jean Abou Samra wrote:
> I would like to call for attention on these bugs:

> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/frescobaldi/+bug/1993213
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/frescobaldi/+bug/1983579
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/frescobaldi/+bug/1991322

> In a nutshell, the Frescobaldi package (LilyPond music sheet editor)
> is completely unusable on Ubuntu Jammy. The fix is to upgrade it to
> Frescobaldi 3.2.

> I hope it's OK I raise this here. I do this because this issue has a
> bad impact on our community, and has received no visible attention
> from Ubuntu maintainers since it was first reported 2 months and
> a half ago.

In a serendipitous coincidence, my son has just started piano lessons and so
I find myself using lilypond for the first time in years.  I wasn't trying
to use frescobaldi - a text editor is enough for me - but it means I am in a
position to confirm the bugs in question.

On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 06:02:37AM -0700, Simon Chopin wrote:
> We usually don't upload new upstream releases to stable series¹, but
> rather cherry-pick specific fixes. This is implied by the SRU rules in
> the "New upstream microreleases" section.

> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates

> This is particularly relevant in this case since the 3.2 version seems
> to have picked up a whole new dependency which isn't even in the
> archive.

> The best way to ensure we fix this in Jammy is to point us towards the
> specific commit(s) that address the problem at hand, or, even better,
> prepare a debdiff with those patches to get the package sponsored.

> ¹: Whole new upstream versions can still be backported when going
> through the Backports process, see https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBackports

I am prepared to argue in this case that a full-upstream update in SRU would
be appropriate on the grounds that the package is completely unusable and
therefore the regression potential is nil, and has a better chance of
correctness than cherry-picking individual commits and hoping we've caught
all the type errors.

This doesn't obviously fix the problem of the missing dependency.  I will
check with the rest of the SRU team how they would want this handled.

-- 
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                                   https://www.debian.org/
slangasek at ubuntu.com                                     vorlon at debian.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-motu/attachments/20221024/4095d6ba/attachment.sig>