On Fri, Nov 29, 2002 at 03:47:29AM +0100, Christian Surchi wrote: > On 17 Nov 2002 Ari made a NMU for logjam 4.0.0+cvs.2002.11.17 and > another one a few days after that date, IIRC, without a note to me. > I was handling bugs for logjam, as you can see in BTS (#165281). Build > failure reported by Junichi Uekawa in that bug was actually a > libcurl-dev bug (#169654). I reported and maintainer closed with an > upload. > > So Ari made the NMU only to close a not so old wishlist bug filed by > himself, faking to close #165281 with his upload. No bug for it against > logjam and instead he closed it with an unuseful "New upstream version" > entry in changelog. I was not MIA and he didn't write any note to me > about his proposal for an NMU. Then he changed to a cvs version, while I > have always packaged stable released version. No notes about it too. > Then he did not follow our guidelines for NMU, because he uploaded > directly to incoming and not to the 7-DAYS delayed queue, so I couldn't > stop his NMU.
I had more here originally, but it's all pretty obvious. I can summarise with the aphorism: Where NMUs are concerned, get it right. All *else* can be forgiven. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | Dept. of Computing, `. `' | Imperial College, `- -><- | London, UK