Hi doko, On 09-05-2019 09:46, Paul Gevers wrote: >> On 02.05.19 10:30, Julien Cristau wrote: >>> From what I understand bug#926009 is a regression in that version. >>> There's no explanation that I can see for that change, no associated >>> bug, and it doesn't look appropriate. Please revert it. >> >> No. The issue is in the LibreOffice package, which already has this fixed in >> testing. The openjdk package also has an appropriate Breaks. > > We are aware that LO is fixed for this change. What we are still missing > is the rationale for why this is needed. We fear that this may break > more things than LO, especially things outside of Debian control. Please > help us understand why you think this is important and why you don't > want to revert it. Any comment, please? Paul
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature