Bug#768139: unblock: mumble/1.2.8-1
On 05.11.14, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
>
> On Wed, 2014-11-05 at 05:43 -0500, Chris Knadle wrote:
> > mumble_1.2.8-1 contains a bugfix of priority "important" for
> > allowing installation with pre-allocated user/group and the
> > package has been in Unstable for 6 days without new bugs reported.
> > Additionally 1.2.8-1 is marked as a "stable" upstream version,
> > where the current 1.2.8~7~g76f6870-2 in Jessie is a "snapshot".
> > The differences in code between the versions are small -- I believe
> > it's literrally only two patches incorporated.
>
> There's also
>
> debian/mumble-server.init | 143 +++++++++++++++++++
>
> which doesn't appear to be mentioned afaics.
*sigh* Thanks for catching this: it wasn't mentioned because I
didn't make this change (AFAIK) and was unaware of it concerning this
upload; I believe what I uploaded to mentors.debian.net for 1.2.8-1
was this:
ftp://ftp.coredump.us/debian-packages/mumble/mumble-1.2.8/
but I see that indeed the package now in unstable contains this file,
and a debdiff between that and the package linked to above shows the
debian/mumble-server.init (and no other differences).
At one time I had accidentily included a debian/mumble-server.init
(in a prior version) because it's something upstream includes in
their PPA package for Ubuntu so I was testing using the file but had
not committed it to git. I had also configured git-buildpackage with
"export = WC" to export the working copy rather than only what's in
git to allow doing a debuild of things I'm not sure I want to commit
yet, so the file got included in one of the uploads -- I removed
it on the next upload which is why 1.2.8~7~g76f6870-2 in Jessie
doesn't contain it. I'll double-check with my package sponsor to see
if he has any insight on what happened in this case.
Other than that, do you have a suggestion as to how I should proceed
from here?
> > debdiff attached.
> >
> > I would have uploaded 1.2.8-1 earlier but my laptop had a hardware
> > failure and didn't have other hardware to read the disk.
> > [The Lenovo T61p uses an Nvidia G84 GPU which was misdesigned such
> > that it eventually fails, requiring motherboard replacement.]
> > I and my package sponsor were unaware that the sid->jessie
> > transition time had been extended from 5 to 10 days for October.
>
> Hmmm, it was mentioned on d-d-a five times.
Yes I see that (Johnathan -- thanks for the links). Ugh. Sorry I
missed this, but now that we've caught an error in thie upload, I'm
sort of glad that I did.
-- Chris
--
Chris Knadle
Chris.Knadle@coredump.us
Reply to: