Bug 219236 – dev-util/bazaar removal request

• Product: Gentoo Linux
• Status: RESOLVED FIXED

[Description Peter Volkov (RETIRED) 2008-04-25 05:16:21 UTC]

Also dev-util/bazaar should be package masked and removed:

====================== http://bazaar-vcs.org/Baz1x ==============================
Baz (baz) is a deprecated implementation of the GNU Arch protocol, designed for usability and performance. baz is still available but we recommend you use Bazaar instead.
=================================================================================

CC'ing python, as the current implementaion is maintained by developer from that herd...

[Comment 1 Doug Goldstein (RETIRED) 2008-04-25 13:48:06 UTC]

pva: Your bug suggests that dev-util/bazaar should not be removed but dbaz. dev-util/bazaar is the suggested replacement for baz.

[Comment 2 Peter Volkov (RETIRED) 2008-04-26 06:56:21 UTC]

I'm not 100% sure as I never followed development of this tools, but seems that we have naming collision here. The announce speaks about baz utility which is installed with dev-util/bazaar package, while new utility name is bzr and which is installed with dev-util/bzr package and that package is installed from sources downloaded from sources from the page announce points to: http://bazaar-vcs.org/Download . Also einfo after installation tells us: 'This package installs the "baz" utility. If you are looking for the "bzr" utility, use "emerge bzr".' Thus I think that I'm correct with my request here.

[Comment 3 Samuli Suominen (RETIRED) 2008-05-15 12:55:42 UTC]

Let's vote then..

+1 (because I've personally been confused by the two packages before)

[Comment 4 Hans de Graaff 2008-05-17 11:56:57 UTC]

+1 from me (also got confused by the two packages being around)

[Comment 5 Jeremy Olexa (darkside) (RETIRED) 2008-05-21 20:51:56 UTC]

+1 same as comment 3 & 4. Or at least rename..to baz?..but why bother?

[Comment 6 Mark Loeser (RETIRED) 2008-05-22 02:58:54 UTC]

punt

[Comment 7 Ali Polatel (RETIRED) 2008-05-22 05:56:47 UTC]

+1 from me fwiw.. This package is dead.

[Comment 8 Jeremy Olexa (darkside) (RETIRED) 2008-05-28 03:59:23 UTC]

22:34 <+darksiide> !rdep dev-util/bazaar
22:34 <+jeeves> dev-util/bazaar <- app-emacs/xtla

@emacs team: Considering that dev-util/bazaar is an || dep with dev-util/tla, could bazaar be removed from DEPEND on app-emacs/xtla? 

[Comment 9 Ulrich Müller 2008-05-28 06:16:14 UTC]

> @emacs team: Considering that dev-util/bazaar is an || dep with dev-util/tla,
> could bazaar be removed from DEPEND on app-emacs/xtla? 

Certainly.

The question rather is if we should remove app-emacs/xtla? Upstream has announced that they will cease development in favour of app-emacs/dvc (which is in the Emacs overlay).
@opfer: Any opinion?

[Comment 10 Christian Faulhammer (RETIRED) 2008-05-28 15:46:19 UTC]

(In reply to comment #9)
> > @emacs team: Considering that dev-util/bazaar is an || dep with dev-util/tla,
> > could bazaar be removed from DEPEND on app-emacs/xtla? 
> 
> Certainly.
> 
> The question rather is if we should remove app-emacs/xtla? Upstream has
> announced that they will cease development in favour of app-emacs/dvc (which is
> in the Emacs overlay).
> @opfer: Any opinion?

 dvc is not usable, xtla is really experimental and is the base of the first...so yes, I am ok with it.

[Comment 11 Ulrich Müller 2008-05-31 08:23:03 UTC]

I've removed the dependency on bazaar from app-emacs/xtla.

[Comment 12 Jeremy Olexa (darkside) (RETIRED) 2008-06-20 02:55:39 UTC]

Taking initiative on this one, please comment if you think otherwise. Thanks.

# Jeremy Olexa <[e-mail]> (20 Jun 2008)
# Masked for removal in ~30 days by the treecleaners
# Dead project and predecessor to dev-util/bzr, use that instead. bug #219236
dev-util/bazaar

[Comment 13 Jeremy Olexa (darkside) (RETIRED) 2008-09-02 13:48:18 UTC]

Removed from tree.