-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Adam C Powell IV wrote: > Greetings,
Hi > Can someone please clarify what's going on here? > > * On November 1, I uploaded petsc-2.3.0-1_i386.changes. > * On Sunday 11/6, Joerg Jaspert marked my upload "rejected for > now", citing number of packages and naming convention as a > reason. > * I gave the reason for my naming convention and number of > packages. > * He hasn't replied in a week. > > What gives? Is this sufficient justification for rejecting a > lintian-clean package? > > What is "rejected for now", and where is such a process/status described > on the Debian website? Do I re-upload the same package, or bump the > version number and re-upload? > > Has my clarification been heard, and accepted? Or Will the package be > rejected again for the same reason? > > Looking for answers... I think the REJECT-FAQ [1] will give you already some answers. I don't think that you convinced Joerg that there are ugly meta packages needed for coexistence of development packages... Probably he won't oppose just dropping the 2 meta packages and keeping the versioned development packages though, but you'll have to ask (or try) as I am not Joerg :-) Cheers Luk [1] http://ftp-master.debian.org/REJECT-FAQ.html - -- Luk Claes - http://people.debian.org/~luk - GPG key 1024D/9B7C328D Fingerprint: D5AF 25FB 316B 53BB 08E7 F999 E544 DE07 9B7C 328D -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDeMe55UTeB5t8Mo0RAmonAJ4yn852PKig0lk11Lw7SEuRE6YGfwCgwAt1 luphV+wsdfDGHuYdWUjvCJM= =2E9q -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]