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

Re: request for Technical Committee ruling on Bug #109436

On Thu, Aug 23, 2001 at 09:11:01AM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> [I'm not calling for a vote yet, we're still in discussion on this, and
> I'm still not sure that this situation requires our participation at all.]
> It looks to me like the right thing to do here is:
> [1] Do something so the new tar.gz file has a file name distinct from
> the old one.  [Guy Maor suggested incrementing the epoch.]

I'm told by folks familiar with katie that using an epoch won't work,
because epochs do not appear on .orig.tar.gz filenames.  The upstream
tarball would thus remain un-renamed from the perspective of the katie

> Any better ideas?

Why is the right thing to do not to consider asking the archive
maintainers to grant my request?

G. Branden Robinson                |     What influenced me to atheism was
Debian GNU/Linux                   |     reading the Bible cover to cover.
branden@deadbeast.net              |     Twice.
http://www.deadbeast.net/~branden/ |     -- J. Michael Straczynski

Reply to: