Bug#245826: t-gnus: please maintain and update the package
|--==> Colin Watson writes:
CW> On Fri, Nov 05, 2004 at 09:44:46AM +0100, free wrote:
>>On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 16:02:05 +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 01:15:12AM +0900, Tatsuya Kinoshita wrote:
>>> > Package: t-gnus
>>> > Version: 6.15.8.00-1
>>> > Severity: serious
>>> > The t-gnus package has not been updated since 2002-11-25 (the
>>> > upstream is still active, T-gnus 6.17.1 revision 00 was released
>>> > on 2004-01-05), and there are lintian errors and other bugs in
>>> > debian/* files. I feel that this package is unsuitable for the
>>> > Debian release.
>>> I've accordingly scheduled t-gnus to be removed from testing. If
>>> somebody wants it back, please fix the release-critical bugs promptly.
>>I've worked a little bit on the package:
>>t-gnus (6.17.2.00-1.1) unstable; urgency=low
>>* New upstream release
>>* Using dpatch
>>* Added reference to the common license file for gpl
>>* Moved postrm to prerm, as the latter is the right place
>>for install-info --remove.
>>* Removed double spaces in description
>>-- Free Ekanayaka <firstname.lastname@example.org> Fri, 5 Nov 2004 00:12:43 +0100
>>The package is now updated, lintian free, and it works (I'm a t-gnus
>>However I discovered that the texi info documentation is GFDL. Shall I
>>package a non-free t-gnus-doc for it?
CW> If you like, but material licensed under the GFDL is permitted in main
CW> for sarge, so don't worry about it too much for now.
CW> Are you willing to be the maintainer for this package? The fewer
CW> orphaned packages we have in a stable release, the better.
Yes, I can do that.
Shall I change the Maintainer field and prepare an NMU?
BTW such at task was also required by my AM in the NM process..