On Thu, 26 Apr 2012, gregor herrmann wrote: > On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 09:33:31 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > > > Talking about improvements, if the following part about NMU acknowledgement > > is > > obsolete as I think, how about removing it, either as a separate bug, or as > > part of the general refresh of the section that is discussed here. > > > > To acknowledge an NMU, include its changes and changelog entry in your > > next > > maintainer upload. If you do not acknowledge the NMU by including the NMU > > changelog entry in your changelog, the bugs will remain closed in the BTS > > but > > will be listed as affecting your maintainer version of the package. > > Is this obsolete? In my understanding this is still how the BTS > works; but I might have missed any changes.
Yes, that's still how the BTS works. Otherwise, the MU is a descendant of the previous MU instead of the NMU. You can alternatively just include the changelog entries from the NMU too. Either works. Don Armstrong -- -tommorow is our permanent address and there they'll scarcely find us(if they do, we'll move away still further:into now -- e.e. cummings "XXXIX" _1 x 1_ http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120425231950.gm3...@rzlab.ucr.edu
