Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I shouldn't have to add my name to the list of maintainers whose > > packages should never be NMUd. > > IS there such a list? I don't think there should be. Yes:
http://bugs.debian.net/ > The NMU was buggy, but with all due respect it appears that the package > had not been updated in a long time before that. The standards-version > was really old and you were using pre-FHS path names. Most (all?) of the packages NMUd were ones whose upstream is no longer active, had no (other) serious open bugs, and generally do not need frequent updating. That is not to say that the bugs are trivialized, but as I was setting aside time this week to work on them anyway, a few e-mails that procedure calls for could have prevented a lot of confusion. Again, I'm not ranting that NMUs occured. I'm ranting that they were not done correctly.
