On Tue, 2012-08-07 at 03:09 -0400, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > As this is a new upstream version, a good argument (with patches, > > etc.) has to be prepared for the release team to have elements for > > their decision about allowing it in wheezy. I think a pre-approval by > > them would even be preferrable. > > James, how does the debdiff look like between the wheezy and sid > versions?
Presuming that's to me (I generally use "Jame" or my first two initials, not my full middle name...): I find that I didn't keep a copy of that run for some reason so I'd need to do it again but IIRC, one large component of that diff was the change for where the css and template files get installed by the package. > In any case, the main justification is the security fixes and the fact > that it's a leaf package. That's what I planned to use, plus noting the number of fixes besides the security related fix as well as quoting (and referencing) the upstream announce message where it is advised that all should upgrade to that version. Jame -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1344419828.27252.10.camel@svrpc
