Re: what to do is maintainer is lacking? (was: wine-unstable in Debian)
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Stefano Zacchiroli <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 10:00:43AM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
>> Debian has NMUs (Non-Maintainer Uploads) -- however this is mainly meant for
>> uploading critical bug fixes without having to resort to hijacking the
>> package, and AFAIK not to be used to upload new versions of the software.
> Before making this kind of claims, I suggest (re-)reading section 5.11.1
> of the Debian Developers Reference, i.e. the section about NMUs:
> it is in fact quite more liberal than what you seem to imply. And it has
> been so for quite a few years now.
Is it reasonable to do an NMU that has a debdiff equivilent of around
500 upstream git commits (the size of ever new upstream wine release)?
Now, the existing NMU guidelines do not mention diff size at all, but
I think everyone that intuitively concludes that a very large NMU diff
is wrong (i.e. how is the maintainer supposed to manage that kind of
mess later). This common knowledge is what leads to the reasonable
conclusion that upstream NMUs are by de facto disallowed.