Re: Why Katie thinks it's an NMU?

To: Magosányi Árpád <mag@bunuel.tii.matav.hu>
Cc: Debian-mentors <debian-mentors@lists.debian.org>
Subject: Re: Why Katie thinks it's an NMU?
From: Roger Leigh <roger@whinlatter.uklinux.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 23:13:46 +0000
Message-id: <[🔎] 87wu5pirpx.fsf@wrynose.whinlatter.uklinux.net>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 1079130078.29951.9.camel@kusturica> (Magosányi Árpád's message of "12 Mar 2004 23:21:17 +0100")
References: <[🔎] 1079130078.29951.9.camel@kusturica>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Magosányi Árpád <mag@bunuel.tii.matav.hu> writes:

> But Katie thinks that my latest two uploads were NMU.
> The same is the case with zorp.
>
> What did I do wrong?

What was the version number?  The Debian revision number should only
be one digit, not two (NMU) or three (binary NMU).

Policy, §5.6.11 may be of some help, and the Developer's Reference,
§5.11.4.1.


Regards,
Roger

- -- 
Roger Leigh

                Printing on GNU/Linux?  http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net/
                GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848.  Please sign and encrypt your mail.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iD8DBQFAUkQoVcFcaSW/uEgRAnnAAJ41Qq0NGr9EBMDwu/XSGCT4MVgRSQCcCde7
lwrkOkSvZ0woxYSo2Ltkeo8=
=lOuQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Why Katie thinks it's an NMU?
  - From: Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org>

References:
- Why Katie thinks it's an NMU?
  - From: Magosányi Árpád <mag@bunuel.tii.matav.hu>

Prev by Date: unreleased fobar_x.y-1 ?
Next by Date: Re: unreleased fobar_x.y-1 ?
Previous by thread: Re: Why Katie thinks it's an NMU?
Next by thread: Re: Why Katie thinks it's an NMU?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread