Re: RFS: emerald
I would be more then happy if emerald and emerald-themes go to
unstable rather then experimental. I uploaded to mentors.debian.net
new packages with unstable in the changelog.
Thanks again for your time and interest for helping me. :)
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Adam Borowski <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 08:23:01PM +0200, Janos Guljas wrote:
>> > I reviewed it, and it appears to work just fine.
>> Thank you for a review.
> Note that I'm not a DD and cannot upload this for you.
> So sponsors, do you hear me? Please handle this fine gentelman.
>> > The only big issue I noticed is that the package is targetted at
>> > experimental instead of unstable -- is there any reason for that?
>> Experimental is targeted because of the freeze and this will be in
>> new. If you think that unstable is acceptable, I'm glad to change?
> The only reason to avoid uploading release-quality packages to unstable is
> to get some more testing for bugfixes to testing since more people run
> unstable than testing+t-p-u. For a new package, that's totally irrelevant,
> and it would force you to do a separate upload later.
> If you could upload it yourself, that would waste "just" buildd resources,
> and since you can't, you'd have to bother a sponsor again. Unless there's
> some other reason I don't know about, I'd go straight to unstable.
> 1KB // Microsoft corollary to Hanlon's razor:
> // Never attribute to stupidity what can be
> // adequately explained by malice.
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com
> Archive: 20100925101201.GA31778@angband.pl">http://lists.debian.org/20100925101201.GA31778@angband.pl