On Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 05:22:04PM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > And? Hows that bad? It means that volunteers have to spend time on this. In any case. And maintainer has to wait etc. I wonder why we don't automate more stuff in Debian. After all we have all the abilities to do it. > > I'd like to suggest fixing the scripts to only flag packages as new if > > it isn't obviously just one of these SONAME changes. As I don't really > > know katie etc. I don't know how complicated this is so I don't just > > start to work on it know but ask if it would make sense to others. > > I vote against it. > Nice example just arrived yesterday: "Just" an soname change, > maintainer didnt fix his scripts, no files installed in .debs. Simple, > nice, example against automated addition of files. Great. I am not trying to prove that this is better in all cases. We are talking about the overall case. With your argument everything should go into new and be checked by ftp admins. After all I could break the new package even without any upstream change. So better put everything into NEW and have the ftp masters check. Silly, isn't it? Greetings Torsten
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature