Hi Nilesh, Nilesh Patra, on 2021-10-27: > On 27 October 2021 2:54:02 am IST, "Étienne Mollier" <emoll...@emlwks999.eu> > wrote: > >Maarten, I'm sorry that the round trip to NEW I contributed to > >trigger stalled your package to not make it in the end. > >On the good news side, now that the package cleared NEW > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > Uhh, sorry but I don't see how this "cleared" NEW? 1.0.1-4 has been rejected > from new, nor do I see any updates a tracker.d.o? > > Do I miss something?
Sorry for the misunderstanding, I meant "cleared" as in "not in NEW anymore", independently of whether it has been accepted or rejected. > And wouldn't new version of libcifpp undergo a proper library transition? -- > so is it not mandated for 1.0.1-4 to be accepted first? At the time of writing, it seemed reasonable to me to transition from 1.0.1-3, which is still in sid and testing, to 2.0.N-M. But I might want to double check this at a more reasonable hour. In any case, the transition would involve another round trip to NEW, due to introduction of the new binary package libcifpp2 with the SONAME bump. Thanks for your thoughs, :) -- Étienne Mollier <emoll...@emlwks999.eu> Fingerprint: 8f91 b227 c7d6 f2b1 948c 8236 793c f67e 8f0d 11da Sent from /dev/tty1, please excuse my verbosity.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
