[pkg-wine-party] Bug#585409: #585409: wine/wine-unstable NMUs; #479659: RFH: wine

Didier 'OdyX' Raboud odyx at debian.org
Thu May 3 12:21:32 UTC 2012


Hi Hilko and Michael,

First, many thanks for your work towards more recent wine packages in
Debian: I definitely hope that this work will allow Wheezy to benefit
from wine 1.4 (and wine 1.5.3 as wine-unstable ?).

That said, I think that the current pace (and content, FWIW) of the NMUs
is fine but aren't really clear in terms of intent: are you interested
in just pushing NMUs out as one-shots (and hence letting the current
maintainers handle the responsibility of the resulting packages) to just
have newer wine versions available or are you interested in becoming
(co-)maintainers of wine (and wine-unstable FWIW). In that latter case,
this intent should IMHO be clearly stated in the #479659 RFH bug
(including links to packaging effort and NMU changes) as that would make
the situation much more clear to outsiders just reading the bugreports.

Le 24.04.2012 15:23, Hilko Bengen a écrit :
> Should we build and upload a wine-gecko package or should the
> dependency in the wine package be modified?

If I read [wG] correctly, wine 1.2 needs wine-gecko 1.0.0, which is
already packaged as wine-gecko-unstable, so for 1.2, I'd just go with a
symlink.

[wG] http://wiki.winehq.org/Gecko

wine 1.4 would need wine-gecko 1.4 which would IMHO preferably be
maintained as the wine-gecko package, allowing the "normal" and
"-unstable" suites to stay unentangled. (The packaging for wine-gecko
should of course be inspired by the one for wine-gecko-unstable.) Do you
need help in that domain?

Cheers and best regards,

OdyX

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 663 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-wine-party/attachments/20120503/c499cc6a/attachment.pgp>


More information about the pkg-wine-party mailing list