The latest upload of xbmc seems a bit botched; this is the changelog in its entirety:
xbmc (2:13.2+dfsg1-2~exp0) UNRELEASED; urgency=medium . * Now, there is nothing wrong with terse and succinct changelogs, but I'd say this is a bit *too* terse, and not at all succinct. Also, should the builders even accept packages that has an invalid distribution specified (in the most recent changelog entry, that is)? Filtering out "UNRELEASED" and packages with an empty changelog would prevent at least some premature uploads. Kind regards, David Weinehall -- /) David Weinehall <t...@debian.org> /) Rime on my window (\ // ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ // Diamond-white roses of fire // \) http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ (/ Beautiful hoar-frost (/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140930113553.ga8...@hirohito.acc.umu.se
