Hi Derek, On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 2:00 AM, Dererk <der...@debian.org> wrote: > Since I think the essence of this Bug Report is clear for everyone and > no objections has been made from any of the parts involved about the > version and the status of the Ceph software present at the archive, I > would like you to clarify what your intentions are surrounding the NMU > request (#714881) or any possible duploads in the closest future. #714881 is already fixed with 0.48-2 , closed the bugreport. Bastian won't NMU Ceph, but started cooperating. He started working on the current pkg-ceph Git tree[1], which is version 0.67.2 . It's the latest stable version. Upstream released 0.68 meanwhile as a development version. Anyway, the current Git package version may not be 100% correct in QA view, but builds and ready for upload.
> Furthermore, If It's possible for you/pkg-ceph team to provide a time > reference of what and when your plans would be taking place, it will be > extremely appreciated. The plan is the following. Bastian made correct improvements to the Git tree. I only included only two of his commits as both are same with my previous but uncommitted changes. I may not agree that he joined the -dbg packages, will read policy about it. As far as I can remember, every library should have its -dbg counterpart and not one joined package. His other commits look fine, will merge them. Yesterday I didn't have time, but today will look into it again. Will upload 0.67.2-1 on Friday evening. I'm not sure we should upload development releases. At least not for Sid, but for experimental. Kind regards, Laszlo/GCS [1] http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-ceph/pkg-ceph.git -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
