[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: please unblock lush

Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> Dear Luk,
> I understand that the transition was quite substantial. But I want
> to rehearse my main concern: without those changes, the version current
> to etch is just of very little (if any) use -- I really doubt that
> it would be used by the users in that shape. I understand that it
> might be easier simply to remove it from the distribution, but since
> there is interest in lush (as popcon shows), it would become a nice
> addition for Scientific subpart of Debian distribution.
> That is why I am asking to bend rules little bit to admit lush to etch
> (I didn't ask that hard for keyjnote package which was in much better
> shape and which didn't get into etch only due to a bug report with
> grave importance with no grounds for that)

264 files changed, 19002 insertions(+), 13351 deletions(-)

No, I'm not going to accept that...



> On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, Luk Claes wrote:
>>> Dear Release Team,
>>> I want to present to your attention lush package which was recently orphaned
>>> and which I decided to take care about in the future, thus I adopted it.
>> Diff is rather large and changes in the build system are not something to do during freeze time, so I'm not unblocking it.

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

Reply to: