On Fri, 2025-02-14 at 20:33 -0500, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> Yes, -3.2 seems best at this point, thanks
Did so. Also reverted my MR.
--
GPG Fingerprint
3DF5 E8AA 43FC 9FDF D086 F195 ADF5 0EDA F8AD D585
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Yes, -3.2 seems best at this point, thanks
On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 5:20 PM Sven Geuer wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2025-02-14 at 23:16 +0100, Sven Geuer wrote:
> > Hi Sandro,
> >
> > On Fri, 2025-02-14 at 16:45 -0500, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> > > yes, roll back asap, as you introduced this change with any
> >
Hello,
> I've prepared an NMU for amule (versioned as 1:2.3.3-3.1) to fix bugs
> #1039123 [1] and #950427 [2].
these bugs are never of such importance to warrant to NMU a package,
you dont force changes this way. please refer to the policy for what
constitutes a valid NMU target.
> I intended to
On Fri, 2025-02-14 at 23:16 +0100, Sven Geuer wrote:
> Hi Sandro,
>
> On Fri, 2025-02-14 at 16:45 -0500, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> > yes, roll back asap, as you introduced this change with any
> > coordination nor agreement.
>
> I would upload a 1:2.3.3-3.2 then, reflecting the state of 1:2.3.3-3,
> d
Hi Sandro,
On Fri, 2025-02-14 at 16:45 -0500, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> yes, roll back asap, as you introduced this change with any
> coordination nor agreement.
I would upload a 1:2.3.3-3.2 then, reflecting the state of 1:2.3.3-3,
do you agree?
Or do you prefer I name it differently, like 1:2.3.3-3.
Package: amule
Version: 1:2.3.3-3
Severity: normal
Tags: patch pending
Dear maintainer,
I've prepared an NMU for amule (versioned as 1:2.3.3-3.1) to fix bugs
#1039123 [1] and #950427 [2]. I intended to uploaded it to DELAYED/10
but accidently uploaded it to INCOMING. Let me know if I should rol
6 matches
Mail list logo
