Hi Niko, Niko Tyni <nt...@debian.org> writes:
... > I mailed fil a (probably overly elaborate) first draft for #865929 some > time ago but haven't heard back yet. I'm not particularly wedded to that, > so happy to consider other options too. Yeah, sorry, I only had time to skim-read it at the time, and then DebConf took my attention. I think the draft was fine (and thanks very much for writing it, as I didn't get anywhere near doing so), but I also agree with you that there's really not a need for a resolution, since it seems like a pretty normal to adopt the conffile from the ashes of the obsolete package. Also, Colin seems to be saying the same thing, here: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=865929#57 That being the case, I just closed it. If anyone wants to add a resolution, we can always just reopen the bug, or simply tack it onto the closed bug, say. BTW I started out with the above paragraph including things like "unless anyone objects", but I'm pretty sure that nobody does, and it's a reversible action, so I just went for it -- I hope nobody minds. Cheers, Phil. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd. |-| http://www.hands.com/ http://ftp.uk.debian.org/ |(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg, GERMANY
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
