Bug#626068: iceweasel: Why only vintage Iceweasel are available in testing ?

[Daniel Kahn Gillmor]

On 05/10/2011 01:45 AM, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 05:03:29PM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
>> Mike, i think your implication here is that these packages won't fare
>> well with xulrunner-dev or libmozjs-dev > 1.9.1; is that right?  Has
>> anyone tried rebuilding them against the experimental dev packages?
> 
> I did. Most don't.

hm.  I just tried building mongodb (picked randomly off the list) and it
did indeed FTBFS against the xulrunner-dev and libmozjs-dev packages
currently in experimental.

What do you think we should do about this?  I agree with mourad that it
would be good to see iceweasel 4 in unstable sooner rather than later;
it works well (thanks!), and it doesn't seem too good to linger long on
versions that are farther removed from upstream attention on something
as critical as a popular web browser. :/

>>> firegpg
>>
>> This one at least has been orphaned (by me) and can be removed from the
>> archive if it's holding up iceweasel 4.  Shall i request this?
> 
> It's not likely to be the most problematic.

I'd be happy to request removal nonetheless, if only to set an example
for moving forward with the other packages.  I've filed #626278 to
request removal of firegpg from the archive.

Now what should we do about the other packages to make this transition
happen?  Is there a plan?  Should we be filing warning bugs against
them?  Let them just FTBFS for a bit?

Regards,

	--dkg

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 1030 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-mozilla-maintainers/attachments/20110510/fe40629b/attachment.pgp>