Now see if you had contacted the maintainer prior to performing the NMU upload you would have found out that your information was in fact flawed. BTS #690080 was to inform of the new upstream maintainer only a month ago and I've been in contact privately. Furthermore 1.9 was only released within the last week by said new upstream maintainer. That my friend is why you contact the maintainer and find out if assistance is in fact needed or else you're just mucking shit up and pissing the maintainer off considerably.
On 12.11.2012 22:17, Michael Gilbert wrote:
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 9:50 PM, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote:
Not my problem... You put the burden on me, I'm giving you the burden since you obviously took the time failing to contact me to ask and ascertain whether the maintainer might actually be in the process of doing anything
with the package.
I read the bug traffic, and the latest maintainer activity was four
months ago.  That's usually a strong indicator that the package needs
help.

The RC issues were introduced by a previous NMU, the issues are resolved in the new upstream release so as far as I'm concerned their "wont-fix" issues
in this version.
I understand that this was introduced by the prior nmu, and that's 
why
this nmu is reverting that broken one.

But as I'm turning the package over to you, do what you like.
You may as well orphan it so it can get cared for either by the QA
team or someone who really cares about it.

Best wishes,
Mike

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Reply via email to