Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
X-Debbugs-Cc: perl@packages.debian.org
Control: affects -1 + src:perl
Control: block -1 with 1151887 1148360 1148361 1148363
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition

Hi,

I'd like to get Perl 5.44 in forky.

Perl 5.44 was released last summer and has been in experimental since
August. As usual, I've run rebuild testing and a couple of debci test
rounds with it. Bugs are at

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=perl-5.44-transition;users=debian-perl@lists.debian.org

Remaining blockers that I'm aware of:

- libdbd-pg-perl (#1151887): patch available, should be easy to fix

- polymake (#1148360): needs upstream work, no idea about the status

- libapp-stacktrace-perl (#1148361): dead upstream, RM candidate?

- libje-perl (#1148363): likewise

Can I upgrade these to serious?

Is it feasible to remove polymake from testing if it isn't fixed?
I'm not interested in working on it myself (mainly because of the
hardcoded refusal to even try to build with newer Perl versions.)

Thanks for your work on the release,

Hi Niko, all,
Looks quite doable:

elbrus@coccia:~$ dak rm --no-action -RB -s testing polymake
gap-polymaking gap-hap gap-hapcryst
Will remove the following packages from testing:

    gap-hap |  1.79+ds-2 | all
gap-hapcryst |    0.2.1-2 | all
gap-polymaking |    0.8.9-1 | all
libpolymake-dev |  4.15-2+b3 | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, loong64,
ppc64el, riscv64, s390x
libpolymake-dev-common |     4.15-2 | all
libpolymake4.15 |  4.15-2+b3 | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, loong64,
ppc64el, riscv64, s390x
   polymake |  4.15-2+b3 | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, loong64, ppc64el,
riscv64, s390x
polymake-common |     4.15-2 | all

Maintainer: Joachim Zobel <jz-2017@heute-morgen.de>, David Bremner
<bremner@debian.org>
------------------- Reason -------------------

----------------------------------------------

Checking reverse dependencies...
No dependency problem found.

\o/

Short update:

I already uploaded this fix (before seeing the transition mail).

Ack, I had a brief look at those packages some time ago, and I agree
that they are RM candidates; so I went ahead and filed ROM bugs right
now.


This leaves us with just polymake.


Cheers,
gregor