On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 03:27:51PM -0500, Chris Knadle wrote: > On Thursday, February 06, 2014 13:59:59 Sebastian Reichel wrote: > [...] > > NMUs don't necessarily need to be minimalistic -- for instance packaging new > versions is something that can be done with NMUs. This is admittedly not > terribly clear and I raised this question in #672198 which hasn't had any > activity for almost two years. Yes, but its advised to change as little as possible. I think changing the packaging style from cdbs to debhelper and similar changes are not ok (note: this is just an example). > For cases where the maintainer is unresponsive for an extended period, I'd > recommend requesting a new version via a 'wishlist' bug, then releasing a new > version as a -0.1 NMU. Others (myself included) have done this successfully. I opened the wishlist bug entry for that (#723781) in September and agree, that uploading a -0.1 NMU would solve the issue of the new upstream version. OTOH having an active maintainer is more helpful than lots of NMUs IMHO. Thus it makes more sense to take over packages or add at least add a Co-Maintianer for this. > As always, thanks for your continued work in Debian. ;-) You are welcome. -- Sebastian
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature