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

Re: Details on nettoe-1.2.1

Mats Erik Andersson wrote:
> Hello again,
> I have now made six commits into the subversion repository.
> The outcome is an UNRELEASED package that is lintian clean
> when built with pbuilder for sid as well as for squeeze, and
> additionally, also on Lenny.
> However, I still need advise (and a sponsor!) on three
> points for this package:
> 1) Barry deFreese has made recent contributions to the nettoe package.
>    His most recent emails, as observed by me, originates from
>    'verizon.net', which is not the address present in the package.
>    Can this fact be ignored?
> 2) This continues the comment by Paul Wise:
> måndag den  4 januari 2010 klockan 09:37 skrev Paul Wise detta:
>> On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 6:17 AM, Mats Erik Andersson
>> <mats.andersson@gisladisker.se> wrote:
>>> Now, in #544916 I filed an ITA in response to an RFA issued by
>>> the Debian Games Team.
>> It appears that you forgot to CC/BCC control@b.d.o so #544916 is still
>> an RFA, not an ITA.
>    I am at loss here. How should I incorporate this bug #544916
>    into the changelog? Keep in mind that the Debian Games Team
>    is still maintainer, and my contribution is as an uploader with
>    intent to continue observing this package
> 3) I have presently altered 'debian/rules' only so far as to
>    conform to compatibility level 7. This was intentionally done
>    to preserve the ability to build this package in Lenny.
>    An alternative would be to reduce the number of targets through
>    the use of 'dh' and override rules. In this case, one either
>    has to leave Lenny behind, or one has to delicately tailor
>    (at least to my limited experience) some target in order
>    to eliminate duplicate configuration etcetera. Ansgar Burchardt
>    observed this also, in another response to my question.
>    As a first step my mind suggests keeping the present rules file,
>    and only in a next package release continue the reformulation
>    of debian/rules. Acceptable?
> Best regards,


Sorry, I'm not sure I understand what you mean about the changes made by me?  I
use my @debian.org address for changelog entries, etc.  As for the RFA, I think
what Paul meant was that you actually forgot to mail control@bugs.debian.org to
actually retitle the bug to an ITA.  Then just close the ITA bug # in the changelog.

Does that help any?


Reply to: