Bug#27906: devel-ref maintainer's opinion on Binary-only NMU's
On Thu 22 Oct 1998, Roman Hodek wrote:
>
> > If policy is changed that for portability issues immediate "normal"
> > NMUs are permitted, then I'd have no problem in doing this. The
> > point is that currently it is _not_ policy, and I'd invoke the wrath
> > of those developers who don't immediately understand the problem,
> > and who subsequently feel that their authority over their package
> > has been stepped on. This _has_ happened in the past...
>
> And the policy decision for the wait period isn't without good
> reasons... If the maintainer is working on a new version and a
> sourceful NMU takes away the sources under his feet, I'd be somewhat
> angry, too :-) I understand the needs of both sides here, and don't
> know a good way to solve this.
Hmm, I usually keep my current version of the sources of my package
locally. It's a small effort to implement any diffs submitted to the
BTS to my development version in any case. So, I don't think that "a
sourceful NMU takes away the sources under his feet" is applicable.
> > Is there a way to find all bug reports submitted by a particular
> > person (i.e. email address) ? This would help here (especially if a
> > constraint could be added such as "older than x days").
>
> I wanted such a thing also already!
I think I'll submit a wishlist bug against the BTS. Or is it programmed
to ignore those? :-)
Paul Slootman
--
home: paul@wurtel.demon.nl | work: paul@murphy.nl | debian: paul@debian.org
http://www.wurtel.demon.nl | Murphy Software, Enschede, the Netherlands
Reply to: