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

Re: Improper NMU (Re: NMU for libquota-perl)

On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 10:41:39AM +0200, Sebastian Rittau wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 01, 2002 at 09:06:20PM -0400, Elie Rosenblum wrote:
> > The NMU was made before I was in any way contacted.
> Would you please stop bitching, you're getting on my nerves. Except you
> nearly nobody sees this as a problem.

Well, it is, for the simple reason that it annoys most maintainers
immensely. See either:

] Bug fixes to unstable by non-maintainers are also acceptable, but only
] as a last resort or with permission.  The following protocol should be
] respected to do an NMU:
]    * Make sure that the package's bug is in the Debian Bug Tracking
]      System (BTS).  If not, submit a bug.

                -- developers-reference


] If the bug
] hasn't been filed yet, or the patch hasn't been sent to the bug,
] you almost certainly shouldn't be making an NMU... yet.

                -- "It's Huntin' Season", posted to -devel-announce in January

You do need to file the bug reports before NMUing. Not necessarily all
that much before -- doing an NMU *doesn't* actually make it any harder
for the maintainer to do an upload later, whether it feels like it or
not -- but before, nevertheless. Anyway, I've already said everything
I might want to say about it in the -devel-announce post, so I'll leave
it at that.


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

 ``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.''

Attachment: pgpkJe8uQhA36.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: