* Alexis Sukrieh [Thu, 22 Dec 2005 16:14:11 +0100]:
Hi,
> * Christoph Martin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) disait :
> > > But I must be wrong, sorry for the noise.
> > No. Thanks for your work. If you think a real NMU would make the case
> > clearer and speed up the inclusion in testing, go ahead. The maintainer
> > of cl-tclink is really not responsive.
> Ok, then I'll contact my sponsor for NMU'ing this package.
> Thanks for your responses.
> I do think it's cleaner to have a changelog entry whenever something
> changes in the Debian archive.
Binary-only NMUs are perfectly ok to solve bugs like this, where only
a recompilation is needed. They just need to get scheduled on all
arches, but there's nothing "unclean" about them. Do you have any
issues with them that you'd like to clear up? :)
Incidentally, though, in this _particular_ case the package could use
a NMU: not because of the existance of previous binNMUs, but because
one of them failed: see #344485. If you feel like it, you could give
it a shot; it'd make a nice one for your NM process, IMHO (but TeX is
involved, so it may end up being a non-trivial one).
Cheers,
--
Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es
Debian Developer adeodato at debian.org
Guy on cell: Yeah, I mean she's not easy to talk to, because, you know,
she'll be like, "What did you do this weekend?" and I'll say, "Nothing",
but really I was fucking some other girl.
-- http://www.overheardinnewyork.com/archives/003179.html
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
