Re: julia_1.0.0-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
My apologies in advance for doing this, but another month has passed.
Another ping from me.
On 2018/10/25 12:24, Ian Jackson wrote:
Ian Jackson writes ("Re: julia_1.0.0-1_amd64.changes REJECTED"):
Lumin writes ("Re: julia_1.0.0-1_amd64.changes REJECTED"):
1. Isn't "incomplete backtrace" a sensible reason to keep debug symbols?
Policy said "should" but not "must". Please tell me what I can do in
order to help improve the src:julia package to satisfy the requirements?
My main concern here is this: AFAICT this package has been REJECTed
solely for this reason. Why is this bug a reason for a REJECT ?
ISTM that it should be filed in the BTS and handled like a normal bug.
Ping, ftpmaster ?
 Assuming it is a bug. The discussion here suggests to me that it
is, but it is really unhelpful to be having it on debian-devel in the
context of an ftpmaster REJECTion.
From the original REJECTion email from mid-August , there were two
issues, but I believe both have been explained in the follow-up emails
and subsequent uploads.