Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: >On Wed, 19 Oct 2005, Steve Langasek wrote: > > >>On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 10:28:55AM +0200, Frank Küster wrote: >> >> >>>Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> >>>>- don't NMU for feature requests (i.e., wishlist bugs) without the >>>> maintainer's prior approval >>>> >>>> >>>Shouldn't NMU's without the maintainers approval be restricted to RC and >>>maybe important bugs? >>> >>> >>Isn't that my question? :) >> >> > >Well, IMHO only if we want to increase the hostile takeovers. What could be >easily solved with a few NMUs will get much uglier. > >Note that I am all for going postal over anyone that breaks an essential >package or does something equally stupid in an NMU. > >There is one thing that should be mandatory on all NMUs, though. It must be >built inside a *CLEAN* pbuilder chroot for whichever distro the NMU is going >to be uploaded to. low-disk-IO autobuilder-style chroots where packages are >installed and removed and sometimes leave breakage behind do NOT count. > > > TRY IT!! https://www.scientificlinux.org/
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
