Hi,
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 6:52 PM, Adam D. Barratt
<a...@adam-barratt.org.uk> wrote:
> On 13.08.2012 00:41, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
>>
>> The bug corrected by this version is correctable only by re-building
>> as you are writing.
>> However, since 7.4.11 or more debhelper were required for this,
>> I updated debhelper to 9. Since Standards-Version was old, it updated.
>
>
> The issue is that in order to accept the changes, a reviewer needs to
> satisfy themselves (at least I'd want to) that the old and new rules files
> are equivalent. That's often not a trivial thing to do when a custom rules
> file has been converted to short-form dh.
>
I understood your point.
>
>> Probably, the renewal of debhelper and Standards-Version will be
>> unnecessary.
>
>
> They /are/ unnecessary.
>
>
>> However, I think that the problem of #682051 is required as
>> PackagesQuality of ReleaseGoal.
>>
>> Is the package which deleted unnecessary updating accepted?
>
>
> You mean a package which is a no-changes source upload of the previous
> package?
Yes.
> That would certainly be acceptable, yes.
>
I already uploaded package include an unnecessary correction.
How do I work about this?
Best regards,
Nobuhiro
--
Nobuhiro Iwamatsu
iwamatsu at {nigauri.org / debian.org}
GPG ID: 40AD1FA6
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
