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

Re: Bug#696899: can anybody sponsor an ITP for premake4 ?

On 04/03/2013 01:57 PM, Peter Pentchev wrote:
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 01:27:48PM +0200, Tobias Hansen wrote:
On 04/03/2013 01:12 PM, Peter Pentchev wrote:
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 11:47:53AM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
A quick look - sorry for the terse feedback. I don't know much about cdbs which
limits my ability to review it very well.

   • the changelog targets unstable, but should target experimental if you
     want an upload prior to wheezy's release

Just for the record, I'm not really sure whether this is true for new
packages - I think newborn packages are not considered for testing
migration at all, are they?

premake 3.7 is in Wheezy. Are they both needed?

I think the submitter explained that in the first message in
the bug log - http://bugs.debian.org/696899#5 :)

The only reason why packages in unstable should not be updated is to keep the possibility to do updates of wheezy packages over unstable. New leafish packages in unstable are no problem at all.

Reply to: