Re: "Netiquette" of requesting package updates
>
>
> I was being purposely vague because I didn't want to single anyone
> out, but no, they're both popular text-only programs. One of
> them is behind by a minor version, the other by a major + 2 minors.
>
> No more clues. :)
Of course, being purposefully vague only serves to annoy us... Which
would you rather see as a maintainer, a note saying that some package
that you may or may not maintain is behind, but they won't specify
which package, or a note that tells you that your package is behind
the upstream release?
You should probably send a message to "maintonly@bugs.debian.org" (I
-think- that's the address), with the line "Package: packagename" as
the first line in the message. That will send a message only to the
maintainer of the package in question, without the rest of us seeing
it.
Of course, if the newer upstream version of the package fixes
important bugs, you might want to file a bug report on those bugs,
mentioning tha the newer version fixes them. Or you could look
through the bug report archives listed by package, and submit a
comment on an existing bug if the upstream version fixes it. If there
is a reason why the maintainer hasn't updated it (such as the newer
upstream version is still in beta and isn't an "official, public"
release, as is the case with libc5, which has a 5.3.x beta series in
development), then he/she will likely tell you.
Just some ideas, and no need to be purposefully vague.
Reply to: