Bug#877610: RFS: libexif/0.6.21-2.1 [NMU]
Hi Adam,
On Friday, 6 October 2017 1:17 PM, Adam Borowski wrote:
> # Does your NMU really fix bugs? ("Bugs" means any kind of bugs, e.g.
> # wishlist bugs for packaging a new upstream version, but care should be
> # taken to minimize the impact to the maintainer.) Fixing cosmetic issues or
> # changing the packaging style (e.g. switching from cdbs to dh) in NMUs is
> # discouraged.
> These rules are less strict than, for example, a stable upload, but there's
> still a good reason to minimize changes not coordinated with the maintainer.
Ah, so package compatibility and lintian issues are considered to be "cosmetic"
in this case?
> Sorry for not being clear: I've put "hostile" into quotation marks, as it's
> irrational to be angry for someone else making fixes in your packages -- at
> least if the fixes are important enough, and the maintainer didn't do so in
> a timely matter. But it happens that certain maintainers consider their
> packages a fiefdom and treat everyone as intruders even if they don't do
> their job properly.
Thanks for the explanation.
> In #786562:
> } I am no longer active in libexif maintenance but I had a look at the
> } NMU diff and it looks fine to me; I'd suggest you to go ahead and
> } upload that.
> Ie, we're here. As the changes were okay'ed, we can proceed with cosmetic
> changes.
Perfect. Looks like I moved too quickly on this. Lesson learnt.
>> Files: po/en_GB.po
>> Copyright: 2009, Bruce Cowan
>> License: LGPL-2.1+
>> [...]
>> Files: po/en_GB.po
>> Copyright: 2010, Robert Readman
>> License: LGPL-2.1+
>>
>> This causes lintian to complain that the first occurrence is not used.
> That's because the first occurrence indeed is not used. The second one
> overrides it. You instead need to write:
>
> Files: po/en_GB.po
> Copyright: 2009, Bruce Cowan
> 2010, Robert Readman
> License: LGPL-2.1+
>
> (Any line starting with whitespace is a continuation.)
Okay, that makes sense. I'm now re-reading the
Debian copyright specifications document.
Thanks for your help. I hope to upload a new version
of this package in the next few days.
Hugh
Reply to: