Re: Need a review and a sponsor for xpdf ITA upload
On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 10:26:52PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-03-02 at 18:09 +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > On the other hand, this package is a part of stretch, and we're in deep
> > freeze. This means, unless you're fixing RC or at least important bugs
> > only (and especially for the latter, with a Release Team preapproval),
> > uploading to unstable is a bad idea. Thus, I'd recommend using experimental
> > for now.
>
> OK; I'll use experimental, even if the new package closes 11 important and
> normal bugs.
Do you think any of those important bugs could warrant going in during the
freeze? That'd require isolating the fixes, which obviously is extra work
no one is forced to do -- but, as the adopter, you're probably best equipped
to assess the gain-to-effort situation.
> Seems like the above command does not work. One example is that the file in
> Debian: xpdf_3.04.orig.tar.gz is not the one found at the upstream site. (some
> files and directories are omitted).
Once a given upstream tarball has been uploaded, all subsequent uploads must
match that tarball exactly. Perhaps the previous maintainer has repacked it
(either intentionally or by using some tool not aware of what the upstream
ships)? In any case, your options include only using the tarball in the
archive, or bumping the upstream version number.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Meow!
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ Collisions shmolisions, let's see them find a collision or second
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ preimage for double rot13!
Reply to: