[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Where did Bacula 1.38.11-7+b1 come from?



Charles Plessy <charles-debian-nospam@plessy.org> writes:
> Le Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 08:36:26AM -0500, Matthias Julius a écrit :
>> John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> writes:
>>> Would it be possible to record the name of the human that marked the
>>> package in debian/changelog?  That would be a big help, I think (and
>>> hopefully avoid a discussion on debian-devel next time it happens) 
>> Since this is about a binNMU where the source package is not touched
>> and the changelog lives inside the source package how is that supposed
>> to be possible?
>> 
>> Adding to the changelog requires a new upload.
> Would it be that a bad idea ? There has been a lot of talk explaining
> that there is no need to leave written justifications for binNMUs, but I
> think that we are stil clueless about the problem it was supposed to
> solve in the case of Bacula...

At least Steve notes the reason for his bin-NMUs on
http://ftp-master.debian.org/~vorlon/transition-binnmus.txt

In the case of bacula, it was indeed done to rebuild against a newer
mysql version.

Marc
-- 
BOFH #445:
Browser's cookie is corrupted -- someone's been nibbling on it.

Attachment: pgphvqcM5I5tY.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: