On 2008-03-04, Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are sponsors going to start recommending changing SONAMEs in an NMU
next? Adding -dbg packages? Of course not, NMUs are different to typical
RFS activity.
of course is changing SONAMEs in a NMU appropriate if it is appropriate.
Having a
On Wed, 2008-03-05 at 10:57 +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
On 2008-03-04, Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are sponsors going to start recommending changing SONAMEs in an NMU
next? Adding -dbg packages? Of course not, NMUs are different to typical
RFS activity.
of course is changing
On Wed, 2008-03-05 at 12:37 +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
On 2008-03-05, Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
of course is changing SONAMEs in a NMU appropriate if it is appropriate.
That equates to a hostile hijacking. If the package is orphaned or if
No it don't. it is just bugfixing. If
On 2008-03-05, Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, fix known bugs but don't delay the RC bugs just to fix less
important ones. That's perverse.
Do two uploads ;) - one to now and one to delayed.
All I'm saying here is that sponsors should not expect NMUs to fix the
full range of
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 01:34:39PM +, Neil Williams wrote:
On Wed, 2008-03-05 at 12:37 +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
On 2008-03-05, Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
of course is changing SONAMEs in a NMU appropriate if it is appropriate.
That equates to a hostile hijacking.
Sune Vuorela wrote:
...snip...
the maintainer is MIA and the package can be orphaned beforehand, fine
(but then it's no longer an NMU, it's a QA upload). Changing a SONAME is
*not* acceptable in an NMU without permission from the maintainer. It is
an especially bad idea when doing NMU's as part
On 2008-03-05, Richard Hecker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If the maintainer is truly MIA, that is a bigger issue than any
single bug. Others have made this argument that we should
Yes. but luckily, we can do both at the same time (fixing bugs and
figuring out wether a maintainer is MIA)
And a
I've been busy with other things elsewhere but some recent uploads from
mentors are confusing me and potentially giving the wrong impression to
those whom we mentor and sponsor, IMHO.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2008/03/msg2.html
I hope to see you all there fixing bugs
2. Perhaps it would be better to have all of the source code
changes done through dpatch or quilt. I know this is an NMU and
being unobtrusive is important, but there are quite a few
upstream source code changes which I think would be better off
in a patch system.
On 04/03/2008, Neil Williams wrote:
So why are we doing this now? This is an NMU - minimal changes
scenario.
Well, maybe the world isn't *that* black and white. Remember, NMUs are
a way to help people fix their bugs, get their packages back into
shape, etc.
IANADD, etc., but I already got a
Cyril Brulebois wrote:
On 04/03/2008, Neil Williams wrote:
So why are we doing this now? This is an NMU - minimal changes
scenario.
Well, maybe the world isn't *that* black and white. Remember, NMUs are
a way to help people fix their bugs, get their packages back into
shape, etc.
On Tue, 04 Mar 2008, Neil Williams wrote:
Note:
only fix bugs that are already filed to the BTS
The rest of the normal NMU rules still apply:
The following quote invites other fixes as well!
On Sun, 02 Mar 2008, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
On Tue, 2008-03-04 at 23:37 +, Neil Williams wrote:
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/rcalc/rcalc_0.5.0-1.3.dsc
http://packages.qa.debian.org/r/rcalc/news/20080303T143226Z.html
This NMU seems to introduce more changes than allowed via NMU. So I
agree with Neil Williams on his
On Tue, 2008-03-04 at 21:31 -0500, Barry deFreese wrote:
I agree with William,
I'm glad that you agree with Neil Williams.
I need to watch my Ps and Qs. However, in this
case voc is MIA.
I don't think that Sam is MIA.
So ideally I suppose what I should do is orphan the
package and
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 2:52 PM, Bart Martens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2008-03-04 at 23:37 +, Neil Williams wrote:
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/rcalc/rcalc_0.5.0-1.3.dsc
http://packages.qa.debian.org/r/rcalc/news/20080303T143226Z.html
This NMU seems to
On Wed, 2008-03-05 at 14:57 +0900, Paul Wise wrote:
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 2:52 PM, Bart Martens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2008-03-04 at 23:37 +, Neil Williams wrote:
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/rcalc/rcalc_0.5.0-1.3.dsc
16 matches
Mail list logo
