Steve Langasek wrote: > On Fri, Jan 19, 2007 at 07:44:47PM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote: >>> Hmm, there's nothing particularly important about the dak package shipped in >>> Debian, it's not used on Debian infrastructure. > >> OK, fine then. > >> Would you guys prefer /me to wait for dak 1.0-8.2 to enter testing >> after you hint it or should I just upload my 1.0-8.3 l10n NMU? > > No preference. I'm not convinced that the dak package should be included in etch. Probably I should file bugs about the issues (feel free to do so): if you install dak and just enter on all questions (thinking you accept all defaults), the whole system is chown'ed to the same user as it puts '/' after nothing as the installation path... another thing is that the current version in unstable still *only* (I wouldn't object at all being able to both use the old and the new names) uses the old names (women's first names while the new names are more descriptive of what the command intends to do) for the commands which should be fixed before being included in a stable release IMHO. Feel free to convince me that the package is ready nevertheless :-) Cheers Luk -- Luk Claes - http://people.debian.org/~luk - GPG key 1024D/9B7C328D Fingerprint: D5AF 25FB 316B 53BB 08E7 F999 E544 DE07 9B7C 328D
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature