On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 03:50:36PM -0800, Britton wrote:
>
> So the documentation in the current docbook-doc is outdated and I should
> replace the existing package with a new one of the same name? If so, do I
> just upload a version with a higher number, or should I use some form
> versioned Provides/Conflicts/Replaces?
Sorry, I wasn't clear. If you check, you'll discover that the current
docbook-doc package is essentially an older version of the "book".
Therefore it's the package maintainer's responsibility to update it,
and that's why I've reassigned this ITP to that package, so that he
becomes aware of the new situation.
> It wasn't my play to replace docbook-doc and I don't know how to proceed.
> I would be happy to try to merge the new documentation into the existing
> package if it still contains useful material. I chose docbook-book as a
> package name because that seemed to be the naming convention used by some
> other package versions of print books.
I'm sure he'll appreciate knowing this.
Thanks for offering to package it,
Julian
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, Queen Mary, Univ. of London
Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see http://people.debian.org/~jdg
