Re: RFS: libxmltooling-java
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 10:38 PM, Matthew Vernon <matthew@debian.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Firstly, thanks for fixing this bug; I obviously missed it arriving somehow.
>
Hi Matthew,
No worries - just trying to help with resolving a defect. This one
seemed at parity with my Debian packaging skill level!
>
> On 30/07/14 21:21, Stephen Nelson wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 6:13 PM, Sylvestre Ledru <sylvestre@debian.org>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 30/07/2014 19:04, Stephen Nelson wrote:
>>>
>>> Usually, it is better to send the patch in the bug itself and if there
>>> is no activity for a few days (on RC bugs),
>>> you can ask for a sponsor on the mailing list.
>>> However, since the bug is RC and open for a month, we could go faster
>>> here.
>>
>>
>> Ok. Would that not imply that someone would need to take the patch,
>> checkout the code, apply the patch and then prepare an upload? i.e.
>> what I've done whilst omitting the patch step. Forgive me if I'm
>> misunderstanding things.
>
>
> In this case, the patch is trivial, so do go ahead (remember to create the
> relevant tag in the git repo), and I don't want to get in the way of people
> improving "my" java packages!
>
Ok. Tags pushed.
>
>> There are many RC bugs in the Java team. I think there is a lack of
>> manpower so I was trying to help with that. Obviously I don't want to
>> create more work for people by not following the correct workflow so
>> I'm happy to be schooled.
>
>
> Speaking personally, for more complex issues I'd like a patch in the bug
> report - so follow-up to the bug with a "this patch fixes this bug, mind if
> I upload it?"
>
Sure, I'll follow that for anything I look at in the future.
>
>>>> In any case, regarding the description fields, I will check with him
>>>> as they are packages he created.
>>>>
>>> Don't hesitate to report a bug with a patch here.
>>>
>>
>> Ok I will do that.
>
>
> I took the description from upstream; I agree it's not very good. It's not
> special prose I'm personally attached to or anything ;-)
>
Yeah, I saw that in the readme file in the source. I'll have a go at
re-wording it for better or worse.
> Regards,
>
> Matthew
>
Cheers,
Stephen
Reply to: