Re: [2002-04-06] Release Status Update
Anthony Towns <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> These packages will get a brief chance to be reconsidered in the
> next few days, but don't bet too heavily on them making it. From
> this point on, packages that are still in testing that have serious,
> grave or critical bugs that get removed probably won't get any
> second chances.
As Will newton pointed out, this is a simple issue of a bug not
getting closed out due to stupidity of the maintainer, which would be
me. I did not intend to use the Closed: syntax in the changelog, but
instead sent email to email@example.com with close BUGID as
described in my copy of bug-maint-mailcontrol.txt which I guess is out
of date and I should have paid closer attention. I now know the
correct interface for closing those bugs and have closed them. This
should not happen again.
I ask that ilisp be returned, if it has already been removed, because
in fact the bug was fixed very quickly after it was reported and the
bug only remained open due to my mistake, not due too any real
instability the package introduced into woody.
The CL community uses ILISP quite a bit and Debian is becoming a very
popular platform for CL development so it would be pity if ILISP were
not in woody because of my mistake dealing witht e bug database, and I
would feel really bad 8^(
Craig Brozefsky <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Free Software Sociopath(tm) http://www.red-bean.com/~craig
Ask me about Common Lisp Enterprise Eggplants at Red Bean!
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org