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

Re: Problem with libpaperg in testing



On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 08:45:44AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> But that's not the case because libpaperg has urgency "medium" but the
> entry for debconf at [1] is:
>      * debconf 0.9.27 (currently 0.2.80.17) (standard) (low)
>           + Maintainer: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>
>           + only 0/10 days old

Such things are easily worked around where necessary, but the problem
with debconf is it's being heavily hacked on yet again (with the new
backend stuff), and, apparently, Joey's not quite ready for it to go
into woody proper yet:

<aj> joeyh: afa debconf is concerned, i think you just need to leave it for 
     a few days and/or pester me into trying to force it
<joeyh> aj: I'm really not ready yet. I have to decide that the transition 
        script is break-proof, and make it start deleting the old db files

The testing scripts don't detect any problems with putting it in woody,
but Joey's judgement is probably better than their's wrt debconf anyway.

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you
  do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.''
                      -- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)



Reply to: