Re: ncbi-tools under Debian Med group maintenance?

[ucko@debian.org (Aaron M. Ucko)]

ucko@debian.org (Aaron M. Ucko) writes:

> lately.)  I now have a plausible-looking draft Git repository, but am
> holding off on pushing it anywhere public until I get a chance to
> sanity check it further.

This review ended up falling by the wayside for far longer than I
intended, for which I must apologize; however, a new upstream release
(more on that below) prompted me to revisit it over the weekend.  I've
posted my final draft, complete with merge annotations and pristine-tar
metadata, at git://amu.scripts.mit.edu/ncbi-tools6.git (browsable via
http://amu.scripts.mit.edu/gitweb.cgi?p=ncbi-tools6.git;a=summary ) in
case anyone wishes to review it further before I upload an official
version to Alioth (probably within a week, but not for at least a day or
two).

To make a long story short, my caution in pushing my initial conversion
attempt proved justified as I wound up having to redo it, in large part
because I hadn't properly configured git-svn for the two-level branch
layout I was using (svn-buildpackage's default, at least when storing
all upstream sources per my preference).

As for the new upstream release, I'm planning to upload it to
experimental out of respect for the freeze; however, I'm tempted to ask
the release team for a freeze exemption for a subsequent upload to
unstable.  (The previous release was a year ago, and the main impact
will be on other binary packages from the same source; there are a few
others that depend on libncbi-tools6 or libvibrant6a, but not on
portions that change at all rapidly.)  Any thoughts on the matter?

-- 
Aaron M. Ucko, KB1CJC (amu at alum.mit.edu, ucko at debian.org)
http://www.mit.edu/~amu/ | http://stuff.mit.edu/cgi/finger/?amu@monk.mit.edu