Packaging Balsa 1.4 or 2.0 for Debian GNU/Linux

[Andrew Lau <netsnipe debianplanet org>]

G'day everyone,
	I'm a package maintainer with the Debian GNU/Linux project [1]
and I've recently volunteered to step in for Jules Bean
<jules@debian.org> for the time being who last packaged Balsa 1.2 for
our distribution. Jules has also agreed to any non-maintainer uploads
(NMUs) I may make.
	Recently, the Balsa package has been left neglected and as of
today has 37 bug reports still open against it on the Debian bug
tracking system [2] and 1.2.4-2.1 [3] is stil the latest version
available in Debian.
	My question for the mailing list, is what direction should I
take in bringing Balsa back up to date in Debian. GNOME 2.0 is now the
default GNOME distribution in unstable, so I will be packaging Balsa
2.0.3 in one form or another.
	Jules has suggseted that I should ignore 1.4 altogether and
have 2.0.3 replace the 1.2 .debs. However, I have some doubts as to
whether 2.0 can successfully convert any preexisting 1.2
configurations. If there are, I would most likely introduce a balsa2
package into Debian and keep the balsa package in line with 1.4
instead.
	So what would you guys like seen done with the Balsa Debian
GNU/Linux packages? Have both balsa and balsa2 debs for the time being
in the distribution or have a single balsa package now?

Yours sincerely,
Andrew "Netsnipe" Lau

[1] http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=netsnipe@debianplanet.org
[2] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=balsa
[3] http://packages.debian.org/unstable/mail/balsa.html


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Andrew "Netsnipe" Lau    Computer Science & Student Representaive, UNSW *
*   # apt-get into it		      Debian GNU/Linux Package Maintainer *
*     <netsnipe(+)debianplanet.org\0>      <alau(+)cse.unsw.edu.au\0>     *
* GnuPG 1024D/2E8B68BD 0B77 73D0 4F3B F286 63F1  9F4A 9B24 C07D 2E8B 68BD *
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

PGP signature