On 2012-09-04 17:06, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
> Actualy, re-reading what you just wrote, yes, a 2.21 branch
> incorporating only packaging changes pertaining to 2.21 would be best.
> Once it's done, I could probably find you someone to sponsor it. :)
Great! I'll provide you with an updated branch
Actualy, re-reading what you just wrote, yes, a 2.21 branch
incorporating only packaging changes pertaining to 2.21 would be best.
Once it's done, I could probably find you someone to sponsor it. :)
2012/9/4 Martin-Éric Racine :
> Hello Christian,
>
> If we could already push something based on th
Hello Christian,
If we could already push something based on the existing 2.21+1.4 into
unstable just to close existing bugs and implement the namespace
migration, it would be ideal. If you'll allow it by explicitly
authorizing me via this bug, I could push it as an NMU and find
someone to sponsor
Hello Martin-Éric,
I incorporated your changes into the development version (3.0) back in
June, but didn't make it in time (with sponsorship) before the Freeze. I
then believed the overall changes to be too great for a freeze exception.
Please feel free to NMU if you want. Alternatively, if you p
Greetings,
I submitted a patch to zd1211-firmware a while back. Since then, other
interesting issues have come up (disparity with the archive's
override, etc.), which I would also like to fix. I am thus hereby
asking you whether you would allow me to perform an NMU on this
package?
Best Regards,
5 matches
Mail list logo
