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

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

On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 12:15:10PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > That depends on your mail-setup. IMHO it's reasonable to expect from DDs
> > to follow -devel-announce without accidently overlooking a post there or
> > two.
> Seeing the mail is one thing.  Fully understanding it and grasping that
> it affects one of your packages and needs to be acted on right now is
> quite another, particularly since in the past this sort of thing has
> always involved filing bug reports.

Therefore the NMU. When you have finally understood the problem and
solved it, either through incorporating the NMU or in your own way, you
(the maintainer) can upload a new version.

And by the use of DELAYED it does not even need to be installed in the
pool before you react. Why get so upset about a, what I can tell from
this discussion, working NMU.

Though, a BTS entry would have been good, it wouldn't have made the
maintainer aware of the problem earlier (unless the NMU was delayed
until the maintainer had a time to fix it himself, of course).

Peter Mathiasson, peter at mathiasson dot nu, http://www.mathiasson.nu
GPG Fingerprint: A9A7 F8F6 9821 F415 B066 77F1 7FF5 C2E6 7BF2 F228

Attachment: pgpnoyAC_XlH7.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: