Hi László, On Di, 2014-08-19 at 08:39 +0200, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote: > On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 1:00 PM, Stephan Sürken > <stephan.suer...@1und1.de> wrote: > > On Mon, 2014-08-18 at 08:24 +0200, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote: > >> I'd like to make it monolithic. I don't see the reason for the split. > >> More work to split them, when the language bindings should be the same > >> version anyway. > > > > Hmm, exactly my reasoning. > While we agree on this, do you know any policy on how this should be > handled? Only FTP-Masters need to adjust their data about packages?
no, I don't know of any special policy or special best practice for this case. I am guessing the best practical approach is: * Create an new 'ITP: thrift' -- it's a new Debian source package. * Explain that it will obsolete the existing source packages. * Explain that it replaces/continues the existing binary packages. Then upload, and deal/fix things with the ftp masters while it's in NEW. In case there _is_ a special practice for that, FTP-Masters will of course bark at you and give you names ;). A risk we all take... Hth, S -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
