Hello Robert, Thanks for your quick answer, Quoting Robert James Clay (jame@rocasa.us): > On Tue, 2012-05-22 at 13:10 -0400, Christian PERRIER wrote: > > If you approve this process, please let us know by replying to this > > mail. > > I certainly welcome the process, but it might be better to postpone > the start of it until perhaps some time next month. Well, the process takes about one month to complete (even more unless I shrking the various delays in the process steps), including the translation update round. So, given the timeframe left by the freeze planned for wheezy release, I think it's much better to start the process now (even if such updates will be OK wrt the free exceptions). > > > If some work in progress on your side would conflict with such a > > rewrite (such as adding or removing debconf templates), please say so, > > and we will defer the review to later in the development cycle. > > I don't anticipate any major changes to them any time soon, but there > has been some changes in the existing templates since the initial > version of LedgerSMB that was accepted into Debian. Once that current > version (1.3.15-2) migrates to Testing, I plan to get a newer version > uploaded; likely the beginning of next month. As it is unlikely that this affects debconf templates, there is indeed no collision.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature