Bug#717076: libjpeg draft resolution
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 11:39:21PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> This was stalled because of an unfortunate interaction with the
> Project Secretary. I think we should press ahead with our resolution.
> I have adapted Colin's resolution text. I have:
> - specified that the transition plan should state timescales
> - replaced the text saying we were overruling the libjpeg8 maintainer
> with text explaining that the dropping of the provides is a direct
> consequence of our decision
> - explicitly stated that we expect the libjpeg8 maintainer to make
> the relevant upload in accordance with the plan and said that
> if it doesn't happen the libjpeg-turbo maintainer should NMU.
> - consequently option A is now only 1:1
Apologies for dropping the ball on this, and thanks for picking it up.
Your changes make sense to me and I'm happy to vote on them.
Colin Watson [firstname.lastname@example.org]