Re: Bug#773632: RFS: pcsx2/1.2.1-783-g1f54bb7+dfsg-1 [ITP]
On 22/12/14 01:08, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 09:03:51PM +1100, Riley Baird wrote:
>> * In d/changelog, urgency should be "low" since it's a new
>> package
> Is this documented somewhere?
My mentor had told me upon the second upload of my package that I
could optionally change the priority to medium (and the New Maintainer
Guide recommends not going above "low"), so that is how I came to
believe this.
I've just checked policy 5.6.17 and it seems that there are no rules
regarding when each of the different urgencies can be used. However,
urgency is defined as "how important it is to upgrade to this version
from previous ones", so given that there are no previous versions, I
would assume that the urgency should be "low" in the case of new packages.
https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#s-f-Urgency
>> * It seems that, to make use of this package, a non-free BIOS is
>> needed. I don't have one, so I can't really do any more testing.
>> Also, is it possible to make much use of this package without a
>> non-free BIOS? If not, the package may have to go into non-free,
>> instead of main.
> ITYM contrib.
Yes, you're right, since it is DFSG-free, but requires software
outside of main to function, it should go into contrib.
Reply to: