Re: RFS: mercurial-server
* Paul Crowley <email@example.com>, 2011-09-08, 11:23:
A change in the most recent revision of Mercurial, 1.9, stopped
mercurial-server from working - mercurial doesn't offer a stable API,
so extensions just have to catch up when it changes.
Do you mean your package doesn't work at all in unstable? Why there's no
RC bug in the BTS then?
The upshot is: this is a popular package that has already been through
the process of being ironed out ready to go into Debian. There are a
couple of minor Lintian bugs; I've put in the fixes to ensure these are
fixed in the next release but I'd rather let them stand in this
Why? Are they particularly hard to fix?
format-3.0-but-debian-changes-patch is a no-go for me, and will make the
Release Team hate you if you ever need to ask them for freeze exception.
Moreover, the contents of debian-changes-1.2-1 (renamed from
debian-changes-1.1-1, sigh...) is really odd. Why isn't this patch
Fix for the other one, out-of-date-standards-version should be trivial.
Why debian/watch is empty? Upstream seems to be providing versioned
tarballs, so that should be easy to write.
Where can we learn more about this "error in security code"?