On 08/04/13 at 16:36 +0700, Prach Pongpanich wrote:
> Hi Lucas,
>
> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 9:19 PM, Lucas Nussbaum <lu...@debian.org> wrote:
> >
> > I don't understand your patch. actually, looking at the DMD code now,
> > I'm wondering if this was not fixed already. the code you patched was
> > already correctly distinguishing unstable and experimental status.
> >
> > What was the goal of your patch?
> >
>
> This patch's purpose does't show "new upstream version available", if
> already in experimental.
but currently it shows "new upstream version available:
#{v['upstream'][:version]} (already in experimental, but not in
unstable)".
I think that's fine, no?
Lucas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130408094630.ga2...@xanadu.blop.info
