New upstream releases for bluefish and docbook-xsl for Etch
I would like to update bluefish and docbook-xsl with it's latest
bluefish: version in Debian is 1.0.6, but 1.0.7 was released soon after
we released 1.0.6 to fix a few bugs. It's really just a bug-fix release:
[upstream NEWS file]
- Updated translations: French, Japanese.
- Adds datarootdir to all Makefile.in to avoid warnings with autoconf 2.60
- Fixes application/bluefish-project MIME type icon name
- Fixes Tcl highlighting
- Fixes a bug when trying to save a file with a new install and a file has
never been opened or a project is not open. Closes bug #360401.
- Fix a bug where Bluefish would crash when deleting multiple bookmarks.
- Fix a bookmark memory leak
- README: more complete README
bluefish itself does not have any important reverse dependency. So any
problem with this update?
docbook-xsl: version in Debian is 1.71.0 and the latest available
upstream version is 1.71.1 - also a bug-fix release fixing a bug
reported to the Debian BTS and several bugs reported only upstream. But
the latter one misses some files in the source tarball and it does not
contain the fix for Debian bug
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=310895. So I was
talking with Michael Smith, one of the upstream authors and release
managers for docbook-xsl and he told me, that he could maybe do a new
release after November 20th. This release would be 1.72.0, because some
changes were made to the behaviour of docbook-xsl. But IMO and AFAIK it
will not break any package/application depending on docbook-xsl. I would
really like to include the latest available docbook-xsl into Etch and
only include important bug-fixes from upstream CVS, not an older
docbook-xsl with massive bug-fixes from upstream CVS - this is always a
pain, because upstream is very active and some bug-fixes need a rewrite
of parts of the stylesheets. So what is your opinion about this? Am I
allowed to include the latest available release into Etch?