On Tue, 19 Aug 2008, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> The past weeks I had several encounters with the situation that a maintainer
> completely overlooked and NMU and uploaded a newer version without
> acknowledging the previous NMU, thereby reintroducing the problem the NMU
> addressed. This happened t
ke, 2008-08-20 kello 09:38 +0200, Raphael Hertzog kirjoitti:
> The maintainer is still king and if he decides that the NMU was not a good
> idea, he would have no other choice than skipping a revision in the
> changelog. That would be confusing.
It would, however, make things a bit more explicit t
On 20/08/08 at 09:38 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Aug 2008, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> > The past weeks I had several encounters with the situation that a
> > maintainer
> > completely overlooked and NMU and uploaded a newer version without
> > acknowledging the previous NMU, thereby
On Wednesday 20 August 2008 10:06, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 20/08/08 at 09:38 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > On Tue, 19 Aug 2008, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> > > The past weeks I had several encounters with the situation that a
> > > maintainer completely overlooked and NMU and uploaded a newer v
On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> But perhaps we need another mechanism to signal this. Consecutive uploads to
> the same distribution should not cause previously present version entries to
> disappear from the changelog. Maybe the archive can reject an upload that
> misses a changel
Lucas Nussbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> After a long delay, here is a final call for reviews and comments for
> DEP1.
Hi! A meta-issue: It would be nice if your DEP1 was freely licensed. I
didn't see a license statement in your text, could one be added?
Thanks,
/Simon
--
To UNS
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> It works well except when the same package version is in two consecutive
> release.
>
> 1.0-1+sarge1 > 1.0-1+etch1 when we really want the opposite. That's why
> this scheme was invented. I agree that it's not very nice though but i
> couldn't find anything "cleaner".
Sh
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 07:35:51PM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > It works well except when the same package version is in two consecutive
> > release.
> > 1.0-1+sarge1 > 1.0-1+etch1 when we really want the opposite. That's why
> > this scheme was invented. I agree that
8 matches
Mail list logo