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:
>  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.
firstname.lastname@example.org | Twice.
http://www.deadbeast.net/~branden/ | -- J. Michael Straczynski