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

Re: away_0.9.5+ds-0+nmu2_multi.changes ACCEPTED into unstable


On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 11:32:55AM +0100, Wookey wrote:
> Really? This is boring stuff that needs doing. I would be grateful if
> someone did it for me on one of my packages, assuming they didn't break
> anything.

Updating to new upstream versions for tiny packages like this is also
boring. You want that done by unnanounced NMUs, too? Fine. Me not.

> As Simon pointed out, such uploads should go via DELAYED/10 in case the
> developer wanst to override (as Rene would in this case, although not

And if one is busy in RL it also might happen  that youjust don't notice.
I can understand for important and RC bugs but not for minor, sorry.

> for any good reason I can discerne). If xnox forgot that then a tut is
> in order.
> > It builds fine. When some distro bogusly introduces changes which make
> > all kind of packages breask they can fix them up; but this is not a reason
> > for NMUing it in Debian.
> Why would you want to actively prevent your package working with --as-needed?

I don't. It works fine and it can be handled when it's really needed - i.e.
when the bug is >= important.

Until then there's no action needed to make it work in Debian. Debian is
not Ubuntus development platform, so why should one NMU stuff for  this
when it's not needed in Debian _yet_?



Reply to: