New version of snpeff in Git (Was: snpeff_4.3t+dfsg1-1_amd64.changes REJECTED)
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: New version of snpeff in Git (Was: snpeff_4.3t+dfsg1-1_amd64.changes REJECTED)
- From: Andreas Tille <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2022 10:31:53 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] YfuhCZUTH8sjPxIk@an3as.eu>
- In-reply-to: <email@example.com>
- References: <E1nBG01-000Chw-D1@fasolo.debian.org> <YewmGheb/SWMj6zI@an3as.eu> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <Yexn6rDu4bIQGxuX@an3as.eu> <email@example.com>
Am Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 09:49:32PM +0100 schrieb Pierre Gruet:
> I did the upload -- I agree autopkgtests would be valuable, still. Yet I
> remember the tests I did when designing the package last Spring, and I feel
> providing a dataset is necessary for even a basic use of snpeff, which, I
> think, makes the design of an autopkgtest difficult.
> But if anyone has specific ideas -- maybe you, Steffen? -- I would be really
> happy to implement them. Or else, I will have a look again!
I realised that you commited 5.1+dfsg which builds nicely for me and
also fixes the watch file (which I'm hunting for in all our packages).
Do you have any reason to wait with uploading the current status in Git?
I mean, if we can't provide an autopkgtest yet the current Git has a
lot of advantages for our users.