Re: miscfiles NMU?
On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 11:22:33PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> The nmu you (Wolfgang Sourdeau) just did of miscfiles was
> None of these were release critical.
You don't have to see NMUs as hostile acts. It is better for the
project if we see them as a helping hand. As far as I know it is
acceptable to NMU also for non-RC bugs.
> You must attempt to contact the developer of a package, and NMU's
> are not appropriate without permission for anything less than a
> serious bug.
Trying to contact the developer is a must, yes.
> Revert the NMU immediately.
You claim in another email that the NMU destabilise the package. How
can these changes do that? The changes seem sane to me. Fixing typos
and dependencies. What is wrong with them?
miscfiles (1.3-3.1) unstable; urgency=low
- depends on fileutils | coreutils (>= 5.2.1) instead
of fileutils; (Closes: #167493, #175700)
- Build-Depend-Indep on the patch package;
- removed ending dot from the description synopsis;
* fixed typos and missing info in na.phone.
(Closes: #249871, #249867, #150264)
* removed duplicate entries in na.phone and currency.
* fixed "Martinique", "Colombia" and "Philippines" in inter.phone.
(Closes: #249897, #249879, #249882)
* fixed typo for CDG entry in airport. (Closes: #249867)
* refreshed the text of the US constitution with the one found at:
(Closes: #190347, #152791)
* fixed entries for Quebec and Saskatchewan in postal.codes.
* Patches for modification to upstream files are put in
$(topdir)/debian/patches/. Code added to debian/rules to handle them.