Am Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 09:50:18AM +0100 schrieb Jonas Smedegaard: > > Given the fact that there was a nearly 4 year old patch (#895957) made > > me feel that I'm not alone with this but on the other hand the creator > > of the patch (thanks Jeremy for doing at least half of the necessary > > work) hesitated to upload his work. This brings up again the > > discussion about how much changes are allowed to simply remove smell > > from packages is accepted. > > Do you mean to say above that "smell removal" is somehow not an NMU?!?
I simply did more than fixing the RC bug and I also did not used DELAYED queue. > I would certainly be frustrated if someone fast-tracked an NMU with > structural changes like switching to short-form dh, with the reasoning > that "the packaged had a smell to it", for a package that I maintain. I confirm that I would not simply pick from the list of smelling packages without good reason (I think a RC bug affecting one of my packages is a good reason). > I recall that we have discussed which packaging style to recommened > someone that has no strong opinion, but I am unaware that we have > decided that "smelly" packages are now somehow "outlawed" in the sense > that they don't need *exactly* the same caution as any other NMU. My point was: If I fix an RC package than I decide to remove smell with the same upload. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
