Good morning Norbert, On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 02:09:26AM +0100, Norbert Preining wrote: > On Di, 17 Nov 2009, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote: > > as the maintainer of etoolbox I request its removal from unstable. There > > Isn't that a bit hurrying? etoolbox is now uninstallable, and I guess > thus biblatex, too. Why would etoolbox be uninstallable? It remains in (usable) in unstable until one of the ftp guys removes it, and it stays in testing until all rdepends are gone in testing, i.e. either biblatex removed from testing or the new version going into testing (which is unlikely in the near future). > And do you expect to have 2009 in unstable *soon*??? Nope. > If yes someone has to actually do some work more, otherwise it will > take quite some time, and for that time biblatex and etoolbox will > be broken. None of them are broken, and etoolbox isn't really of use to anyone for that matter. We just pushed it into the archive to have the docs of biblatex buildable, remember? It even recommends in its docs to not use it for anything important... :) > I would have suggested an upload to experimental, as I did with lmodern > and tex-common. biblatex isn't that experimental any more and I think we sometime have to take ourselves seriously: testing remains intact with this solution and unstable is, well, unstable... :) Hauke
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature