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... Cheers Luk > 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