Re: Accepted isdnutils 1:3.9.20060704+dfsg.2-7 (source all amd64)
Mehdi,
thank you for your mail.
If you were aware of the mentors.debian.net package and the discussion
then why ask the question in the way you asked it? I have received no
further replies to my last message and certainly nothing that would made
me reconsider my position. If anything I should be the one asking those
questions.
On 12.12.2010 18:57, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> Well, I did check the package on mentors and it doesn't match what we asked.
And I explained my position as package maintainer that I do not intend
to bring the dependency on makedev or udev back. I don't feel to repeat
my arguments here, but I feel the need to repeat that I stand by them.
The more I think about it the more arguemnts I find against bringing
back that incorrect dependency. It would be just plain silly, it seems.
Take 2-7 which has no RC-relevant bug or use 2-8 from mentors if you
prefer that. At this point, I'm strictly against anything else. My
strong preference is for the current 2-8 up at mentors to make it for
squeeze.
Regards
Rolf
Reply to: