Please upgrade to pidgin 2.5.0

Bug #259453 reported by Hew on 2008-08-19
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
pidgin (Ubuntu)
Stefan Lesicnik

Bug Description

Binary package hint: pidgin

Pidgin 2.5.0 has been released, which contains a number of new features (notably MSNP15) and bugfixes.

Related branches

Hew (hew) on 2008-08-19
Changed in pidgin:
importance: Undecided → Wishlist
Niels Egberts (nielsegberts) wrote :

I'm in favor of upgrading to 2.5.0 at least in Intrepid.

Stefan Lesicnik (stefanlsd) wrote :

I will look at upgrading this.

Changed in pidgin:
assignee: nobody → stefanlsd
status: New → In Progress
Stefan Lesicnik (stefanlsd) wrote :

Attached is diff.gz to Pidgin 2.5.0. Can anyone offer some feedback on this before i subscribe u-m-s. Thanks :)

I have also uploaded this to my PPA -

Bart Verwilst (verwilst) wrote :

Could you build it for hardy as well please Stefan?

Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :

do you know if the 2.5 version is a stable or unstable one?

Bart Verwilst (verwilst) wrote :

2.5.0 is the latest stable version of Pidgin

Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :

the pidgin versionning scheme is confusing, where is it written that the version is a stable one?

Bart Verwilst (verwilst) wrote :

Confusing? How's that? Every release they bring out is considered stable.. :)

Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :

why do they change the versionning, using 2.4.n and then 2.5? GNOME and other project also use odd number for unstable versions

Bart Verwilst (verwilst) wrote :

Not all software projects use the same versioning scheme as Gnome eh ;)
x.y.z, where y + 1 when a lot of new shiny features are included, z +1 when it's mostly bugfixes. Pidgin is too small to have a stable and unstable versioning scheme imo :)

Hew (hew) wrote :

Pidgin does not follow an odd/even version scheme such as Gnome. Pidgin 2.5.0 is a major new stable version; they have not changed versioning schemes. Development is done using mtn, and the 'unstable' development has been conducted there for some time.

For further evidence that Pidgin 2.5.0 is stable:
Pidgin front page -
Pidgin 2.5.0 milestone 100% complete -
Pidgin at Wikipedia -
Ask anyone at #pidgin on freenode.

I assume you've looked at the versions in current Ubuntu releases which is why you have raised your concerns; it is just coincidence that they have been even numbered releases in the past.

Launchpad Janitor (janitor) wrote :

This bug was fixed in the package pidgin - 1:2.5.0-0ubuntu1

pidgin (1:2.5.0-0ubuntu1) intrepid; urgency=low

  * New upstream version (lp: #259453)
  * debian/libpurple0.symbols:
    - new version update
  * debian/patches/00_debian-ca-certs.patch:
    - not required in the new version there is a configure option
  * debian/patches/02_manpage-desc.patch:
    - the change is in the new version
  * debian/patches/03_gconf-gstreamer.patch:
    - the change is in the new version
  * debian/patches/16_yahoo_icon_crash.patch:
    - not required the new versions fixes the issue
  * debian/patches/20_purple-remote_friendly.patch:
    - the change is in the new version
  * debian/patches/21_zephyr-external.patch:
    - don't use debian change which doesn't apply to the new version
  * debian/patches/75_occured-occurred.patch:
    - the change is in the new version
  * debian/rules:
    - use new configure option to specificy ssl-certs directory

 -- Sebastien Bacher <email address hidden> Wed, 20 Aug 2008 16:09:04 +0200

Changed in pidgin:
status: In Progress → Fix Released
Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :

Thanks to everybody who contributed to the bug, I did the update because I'm holidays tonight and the sponsoring would have delayed the upload quite a bit since changes were required and it's not likely that the comment, update rounds would have been quick enough to get that uploaded today

some notes about the update:
- the symbols list need to be updated when the libpurple public api change, dpkg-gensymbols can be used for that
- the new version has an option to use the system ssl certs so the debian patch was not required
- the rules has configure options and the ssl certs directory needed to be specified there

Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :

could anybody in touch see if they really need to ca-certs directory to be available during build? that seems a non useful requirement, if an user gives a directory to the configure that should be enough

Hew (hew) wrote :

<elb> Hew: I don't see why it should be required for build
<elb> someone will have to change
<elb> though, changing it means typos become more problematic
<Hew> elb: Is this a problem that should be taken care of on the upstream/pidgin side?
<elb> Hew: maybe

MrZaius (cragos) wrote :

Any chance of a backport? The current version in Hardy (2.4.1, four releases behind the current build) does not function, lacking support for three of the five-six major networks.

::::There aren't many, but it's moments like this that make me miss Gentoo::::

Hew (hew) wrote :

Hardy backport request already exists at bug 260070. Pidgin 2.4.3 is currently in hardy-backports though, so I'm not sure what you mean by Hardy being four releases behind.

ubuntu_demon (ubuntu-demon) wrote :

Pidgin Version 2.5.1 (08/31/2008) is already out.

Hew (hew) wrote :

There is no need to comment on this bug about that. An upgrade request for 2.5.1 already exists at bug 263612.

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers