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

Re: Bug#241689: I'm going to NMU this

On Sun, Aug 29, 2004 at 07:09:09PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > (b) that you were a Debian Developer therefore *could* NMU a package.

> I don't need to be a DD to NMU something.

Who is signing these uploads for you?

> > (c) that a wishlist bug against an "informational list of packages" was
> >     more important than the hundreds of RC bugs still outstanding
> >     against sarge.

> The package fails to build from source and as far as amd64 goes this
> is severity serious. For me that is far more important than hundreds
> of RC bugs that are not against build-essential or base packages.

As far as amd64 goes, there are *no* bugs of severity: serious in
Debian.  amd64 is not a release architecture at present, and policy does
not contain any amd64-specific requirements.

> The urgency is to get the sarge sources to build for amd64 so the
> amd64 release deviates as little as possible from the official sarge
> and the RM team has agreed to allow such changes through t-p-u.

Please refresh my memory re: where this was agreed to.  I don't remember
anyone being given carte blanche to upload amd64-specific changes to
t-p-u, and I certainly don't think we've said anything to suggest we
want to be used as a weapon when arguing with maintainers about amd64

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: