Hi Ron, On Sat, 20 Oct 2012 05:10:11 +1030 Ron <r...@debian.org> wrote: > > As libsnack2 maintainer suggested, just will solve this problem. > > So I'll put fixed version to 10-days delay queue. Ron, if you don't want > > it, please tell me to cancel it. For detail, see attached patch. > > I think I'd have preferred this to go to experimental if people are itching > to have it available before the Wheezy freeze is over. Especially since > snack upstream appears to have some concern about how well it really works > with alsa ...
Once canceled upload. Well, "Depends: libsnack2-alsa | libsnack2" would pull libsnack2-alsa, so it may cause problem by pulling -alsa first, but "Depends: libsnack2 | libsnack2-alsa" wouldn't. So I proposed again as it as setting "Depends: libsnack2 | libsnack2-alsa". > But since it's not forcing people to use alsa, I'm inclined to not fuss > over that too much right now. Worst case I might revert it if we do need > to push an update of wavesurfer that does need to go into Wheezy though, > as I'd prefer to avoid any new RC bugs that using it with alsa could add > at this late stage of the game. This change will not force people using alsa, so - default setting: pull libsnack2 - people who want to use it with alsa: pull libsnack2-alsa And how about putting this to unstable, then testing-proposed-updates? Its change can be reverted easily, and if we put new package to experimental probably people who will use it is not enough to test it. -- Regards, Hideki Yamane henrich @ debian.or.jp/org http://wiki.debian.org/HidekiYamane -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
