On Wednesday, April 18, 2012 10:21:45, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 10:00:43AM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote: > > Debian has NMUs (Non-Maintainer Uploads) -- however this is mainly meant > > for uploading critical bug fixes without having to resort to hijacking > > the package, and AFAIK not to be used to upload new versions of the > > software. > > Before making this kind of claims, I suggest (re-)reading section 5.11.1 > of the Debian Developers Reference, i.e. the section about NMUs: > > http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#nmu-guide > lines > > it is in fact quite more liberal than what you seem to imply. And it has > been so for quite a few years now.
Thanks -- however after reading it, my opinion of NMUs has not changed, except for lowering of severity level. [And realistically at least in the general case I don't think another DD is going to do an NMU if a bug is not RC.] The way section 5.11 is written, it implies NMUs are for bug fixes only. It literally states "Fixing cosmetic issues or changing the packaging style in NMUs is discouraged." Nowhere in the section is it implied that NMUs can be used to upload new versions of software, so I still think that's not what they're for. :-/ [Please correct me if you believe this is not the case.] On a side note, I saw your opening talk at DebConf10 where you discussed NMUs, so I understand that you encourage them in general, but I'm not sure this is a case [i.e. the Wine packages] where you'd recommend using them. -- Chris -- Chris Knadle chris.kna...@coredump.us GPG Key: 4096R/0x1E759A726A9FDD74
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
