On 23 April 2016 at 00:06, Nicholas D Steeves <nstee...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 21 April 2016 at 08:33, Christian Seiler <christ...@iwakd.de> wrote: >> Hi Gianfranco, >> >> On 04/21/2016 09:48 AM, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: >>>> activate update-initramfs >>> do you think it is worth adding to the current NMU or it is better to leave >>> it for >>> a future upload? >> >> I'm not sure if you meant to ask me, but just in case: I would suggest >> you do so, but it's not my decision, as it's not my package. ;-) >> >>> the change looks good, I think it has no side effects, > > I really like this change to using a trigger! It also works fine on > Jessie, meaning it won't complicate maintaining a backport. As I'm > not listed in Uploaders, Maintainers, or Changed-by, would making this > change be considered a package hijack?
I haven't looked closely, but i have a lot dubious emails about btrfs package. (a) i do not maintain backports, anybody is free to do those (b) all of my packages are lowNMU, meaning I trust any/all DDs to do sensible things (c) I do not trust any other developers, meaning that nobody should be granting DM and/or changing Uploaders/Maintainers fields etc (d) any other fixes is fine to be uploaded, and if things break I am on the hook to fix things up afterwards =) http://blog.surgut.co.uk/2013/01/thoughts-on-debian-package-policies.html -- Regards, Dimitri.
