On Tue, Jan 02, 2007 at 02:50:48PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > No, it's not fine. The time for new upstream versions is past; the freeze > policy allows for targetted fixes only, and by your own admission this > update is anything but a targetted fix. > > If you and upstream could manage to identify an isolated fix for bug > #405304, that would be accepted; a 3000-line upstream diff will not. Unfortunately we are talking about an upstream that releases about once every six months, and who mentions right off-the-bat on the project's webpage that "Please note: Always download and test the CVS version of libgmail if you are having problems", so getting them to pinpoint what change fixes this particular problem is going to be a no-go. On the other hand, I just diffed the code between 0.1.5.1 and the CVS version as of today (which I packaged this morning), and it's "only" 58 lines (attached). If I had to guess, I'd say the last chunk is what fixes the problem at hand, but I'm not positive, since I don't have a test-case handy to try and reproduce this problem. Is this 58-line upstream diff good enough (I wouldn't call that a _new upstream_), or would you rather have me backport what I *think* is a fix for #405304 ? Cheers, --Seb
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature