Re: Intent to NMU atlas3 to fix pending po-debconf l10n bugs
* Christian Perrier <bubulle@debian.org> [2008-03-24 11:27]:
> But, still, as long as atlas3 is in unstable, I'l consider NMUing
> it. Actually, I could quite safely NMU both of them. There's a quite big
> chance that it is useless for atlas3 but that doesn't really harm ("ça
> fait pas de mal"....:-))
Indeed, "ça ne fera pas de mal". However, I think that fixing atlas is much
more important than fixing atlas3, since the later will probably disappear
in the future (perhaps post-lenny, although it is already useless today).
In sum, go ahead and fix atlas3, if you see fit. However, please consider
fixing atlas, too.
> Would an upload of atlas3 interfere with some transition?
I do not think so. On the other hand, atlas is involved in the gfortran
"transition" (well, it is not really a transition because atlas is already
in testing and is not blocking anything).
It would be safer to ask at debian-release or contact Riku Voipio and
Mathias Klose, the responsibles maitntainers for the gfortran transition
[1].
[1] http://wiki.debian.org/GfortranTransition
Cheers,
--
Rafael
Reply to: