On Mon, 2011-07-11 at 20:37 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > 2011/7/11 Adam D. Barratt <a...@adam-barratt.org.uk>: > > I notice that you've already uploaded the package including both sets of > > changes. Whilst we're admittedly sometimes not the fastest to respond, > > a lack of negative reply does not equate to permission to upload - > > particularly when barely 24 hours have passed since the initial request. > > Sorry about that, I wasn't sure if approval needed to happen before or > after the upload.
Having it beforehand tends to make things easier if there are any queries or issues. > I'll keep in mind next time. Thanks. > > In any case, I'm afraid I'll be rejecting the upload, due to the amount > > of cruft in the diff; e.g. [...] > Those issues aside, are the diffs I presented acceptable? In all honesty, I haven't yet had time to review them; I mostly replied at this point because of the diff noise - if it hadn't been for that, I'd probably not have commented until I (or someone else) had checked them a little more. Looking at the BTS, it appears from the log of #601803 that the proposed changes to ifconfig for wireless support have not yet been proved to be complete and functional in unstable - is that correct? Where the issue applies to both stable and unstable/testing, having it resolved in the latter suites is generally a prerequisite for a stable update. Regards, Adam -- 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/1310411462.7403.28.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
