Hi, 2008/11/30 Holger Levsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: [...] > On Sunday 30 November 2008 05:04, Raphael Geissert wrote: >> Right, but it is a DFSG-freeness issue and those take time to >> *properly* resolve. > > That depends, sometimes removal of those bits doesnt hurt. Also, removing > those bits is usually better than removing the package.
The package would not be removed, the issue would have been fixed either by getting permission from the copyright holder, or by *properly* removing the affected code. By coordinating the removal of the code the following things could have been done: 1.- Decide the proper naming of the uploaded package version 2.- Ensuring that the watch file mangles the Debian version and that it calls a script designed to strip the code from the downloaded tarball, so that there is no need to manually remove it from future tarballs[1]. 3.- Including patches for a couple of issues that were pending to be uploaded. [1] The dbase extension has been removed by upstream for the 5.3.x series, but the future releases of the 5.2.x will still include it. > > Having an RC bug open without a reply for three weeks at this stage of the > release is just not acceptable. The "offending code" can quickly be dated back to 9 years ago; and IMO it is not about "getting it ready for the release:" it affects all versions of the package. > > > regards, > Holger > Regards, -- Raphael Geissert - Debian Maintainer www.debian.org - get.debian.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
