On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 12:58:31PM +0100, Enrico Tassi wrote: > > Why was this uploaded to testing-proposed-updates without consulting > > debian-release first? We're still waiting for a version to reach testing > > that fixes the known RC bugs; reuploads delay getting the package into a > > state where it can be pushed into testing, and I'm not sure what this latest > > upload is even supposed to fix because it's for an issue that's not even in > > the BTS.
> Sorry for the caotic way we are handling the package. > 0.2.5-2etch1 is fine for testing, and fixes all the known RC bugs about the > package. But pushing that version into testing is no longer possible, because it was overwritten by your later uploads. > In the meanwhile the kernel team decided to accept linux-wlan-ng into > the modules-extra package so that the modules for lwng will be > automatically rebuilt every kernel upload. I hope you don't mean that they're doing this for etch, those aren't changes that should be made during the freeze. > While reviewing the package they found that a file (namely the utility to > upload firmware, prism2dl.c) was under a non DFSG compliant license (and > worse, it was not redistributable at all). The package already contains a > script to download the firmware (non redistributable either) from upstream > svn repository, so we removed the incriminated .c file for the orig.tar.gz > and fixed the script to download the .c file from upstream svn > repository too. This lead to 0.2.5+dfsg-1etch1. > Unfortunately we made a mistake in 0.2.5+dfsg-1etch1 regarding the way > prism2dl.1 is installed. We fixed that in 0.2.5+dfsg-1etch2. > Sorry that this was confusing and not well documented in the bts, but > when I saw the non redistributable file I fired the upload asap. Few > days later the upstream answered my request of clarification about the > license of that file and he changed it in the upstream repository to > GPL/MPL. Given that the license has been clarified so that this code is really free, and the diff between 0.2.5-2etch1 and 0.2.5+dfsg-1etch2 is fairly extensive in order to support this additional download change, I would ask that you re-upload to t-p-u a package equivalent to the 0.2.5-2etch1 which had already been approved. That does unfortunately require another re-roll of the original upstream tarball under a different version number, so that it sorts between 0.2.5+dfsg-1etch2 and 0.2.6. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
