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

Re: espeakup_0.71-20_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable



Hi,

Samuel Thibault <sthibault@debian.org> (2016-01-01):
> Hello,
> 
> Cyril Brulebois, on Fri 01 Jan 2016 17:21:28 +0100, wrote:
> > Debian FTP Masters <ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org> (2015-12-26):
> > >  espeakup (1:0.71-20) unstable; urgency=medium
> > >  .
> > >    * espeakup-udeb.sh: Preseed installing MATE desktop by default when espeakup
> > >      is used in d-i.
> > >    * compat: Bump to 9.
> > >    * rules: Clear.
> > >    * patches: Switch to 3.0 patch system.
> > 
> > is leaving changes from 1:0.71-19 aside expected?
> 
> Oops.  Actually, yes and no.  The -19 change was meant as a workaround
> for Jessie, and the underlying race to be fixed for Stretch, but the
> latter hasn't happened yet.  So I have now uploaded a -22 which does
> include the -19 changes, so that we have the workaround until we fix the
> underlying race.

ACK; I only followed this remotely so I wasn't absolutely sure, thanks
for the full story.

Since there aren't too many other changes I wanted to wait on (basically
only flash-kernel), and since the changes are fairly new, I've decided
not to rush things for espeakup (so that it would have been included
into the upcoming d-i release).

> > Having a rewritten changelog entry showing up in “d espeakup” was a
> > bit strange so I thought I'd ask (I don't quite get what's expected
> > to be in the debian-jessie, debian, and master branches).
> 
> debian-jessie is the Jessie branch . The debian branch is not supposed
> to exist.

OK. :)

> Thanks for the proofread,
> Samuel

You're welcome.

Mraw,
KiBi.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: