Re: [Backports-queue] Processing of qemu-kvm_0.11.1+dfsg-1~bpo50+1_amd64.changes
Faidon Liambotis schrieb am Thursday, den 18. March 2010:
> Alexander Wirt wrote:
> >> qemu-kvm_0.11.1+dfsg-1~bpo50+1_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
> >> along with the files:
> >> qemu-kvm_0.11.1+dfsg-1~bpo50+1.dsc
> >> qemu-kvm_0.11.1+dfsg.orig.tar.gz
> >> qemu-kvm_0.11.1+dfsg-1~bpo50+1.diff.gz
> >> qemu-kvm_0.11.1+dfsg-1~bpo50+1_amd64.deb
> >> qemu-kvm-dbg_0.11.1+dfsg-1~bpo50+1_amd64.deb
> > Hu?
> > I'm a little bit surprised. In the past I maintained the kvm related stuff in
> > bpo. I was currently in the testing phase of qemu-kvm and now I see somebody
> > else uploaded it.
> >
> > Please don't do such things without contacting the former uploader.
> > Its not that I'm that hard to get.
> >
> > Speaking as the maintainer and as ftp-master of bpo
> Oh, I'm sorry.
>
> It's been over 2 months since that version was migrated to testing and I
> didn't think you'd care. We were using this at work and I decided that
> it's better to have it in bpo than have it in the internal repository.
>
> Contacting the former uploader is on bpo's best practices but it's on a
> strict rule of bpo, is it? Not that it's a bad idea, it's just not
> always very practical.
>
> Again, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to upset you, but I don't see a reason
> to be upset anyway.
I'm not upset, just surprised. Especially after the last mails about the
dh_ocaml desaster I expected that I would get a mail before a hijack.
Alex
Reply to: