On 11/30/2010 05:25 PM, Andreas (Debian) wrote: > Hi, > > thanks to the support of upstream there is a new release which fixes the > issue. However, the issue does not even really exist in *effective* > upstream code - it is just contained in a *comment* which is simlpy > activated in a patch in the Debian packaging. So I wonder what might > be the best strategy to handle this. > > 1. Use upstream bugfix version which provides the proper PYTHONPATH > setting in the comment which will be activated later plus a > 7 line patch in some unrelated code which is unlikely to break > something else. > 2. Simply patch 0.7.9 to fix only the reported issue but leave a > nasty bug in upstream. > > All other changes in the code are autogenerated documentation changes > and thus excluded via "--exclude=*user-manual* --exclude=*api*" from the > diff (also --exclude=Gnumed was used to hide duplication of diffs > because directory Gnumed is a symlinc to client). > > My prefered solution is to upload 0.7.10 to testing-proposed-updates > (because there is just a version 0.8.4 in unstable). >
Uploading 0.7.10 to t-p-u is fine. Could you please go ahead with the upload? Regards, -- Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي http://dogguy.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4cfb7bbb.7010...@dogguy.org
