On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 09:50:10AM -0000, glondu-guest@users.alioth.debian.org wrote:
> Author: glondu-guest
> Date: Tue Jun 3 09:50:09 2008
> New Revision: 5738
>
> URL: http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-ocaml-maint/?sc=1&rev=5738
> Log:
> * New upstream release.
> * Add myself to Uploaders, and DM-Upload-Allowed field.
Why so?
I've two objection on this. The first one is that it is not wise to
update to a new upstream release this late in the release process,
especially for pcre-ocaml which is one of the bottom package in our
dependency graph. Even though the interface did not change, the
implementations could have, and due to inlining this can break native
code linking. If now we have to fix the current version of pcre-ocaml
in unstable we will need to
The second objection is that, even if I'm totally open to collaborative
maintenance (as you can see, I'm in the LowThresholdNMU page),
performing this kind of change without asking who has always maintained
the package since the very beginning seems a bit ... well, rude to me.
Adding a DM-Upload-Allowed field is a delicate thing, please don't do
that without asking in advance the usual package maintainer.
That said, I have no objection at all in having DM-Upload-Allowed set to
yes in pcre-ocaml, nor in having you as an Uploader, but please in the
future ask before adding DM-Upload-Allowed just because you can do that
in the repository.
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
I'm still an SGML person,this newfangled /\ All one has to do is hit the
XML stuff is so ... simplistic -- Manoj \/ right keys at the right time
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature