Re: jlapack_0.8~dfsg-3~bpo8+1_amd64.changes REJECTED
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 10:31:55AM +0200, Rhonda D'Vine wrote:
> > > So how can I backport my final target beast-mcmc to Jessie (main) if the
> > > preconditions are only residing in contrib?
> >
> > You could move beast-mcmc back to contrib.
For me that would be a step backwards since I was litterally fighting to
get a free beast-mcmc for 5 years.
> > But I have a problem with
> > non-change backports (no idea what rhonda is thinking about it).
>
> Frankly spoken, I think it makes sense when the backported aim is
> beast-mcmc which now sits in main to have those toolchain changes happen
> in backports, too. Yes, it's a bit of a corner case, but I think it is
> part of our social contract here, putting the emphasis on free software
> as our priority.
+1
> Though, what I'm absolutely *not* fine with is that this wasn't brought
> up beforehand and that we are expected to figure that out on our own.
Sorry, my fault.
> I always stated clearly that we are willing to listen to reasoning and
> discuss things, and not have things dumped on us to stay here puzzled
> not knowing what's going on and why something is done out of the
> ordinary.
May be I have not yet fully understood all the checks you are doing,
specifically I was not aware of the "no relevant changes" check.
> It is not acceptable to do things that aren't so-to-say standard
> procedure and either try to sneak them in or wait for us to figure it
> out without getting in contact at all.
It was absolutely not intended to sneak something in - just a bit naive.
Please assume that I was considering the change from contrib to main
a relevant change. Next time I'll post this here first.
May I assume that it is fine to re-upload jlapack and once this is
accepted netlib-java and mtj as well which have pretty the same reason
and minimal changelog.
Kind regards and sorry for creating this confusion
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: