Your message dated Wed, 29 Jun 2016 00:20:47 -0400
with message-id <3307261.AffyaU2slz@kitterma-e6430>
and subject line Re: ftp.debian.org: tidy and tidy-html5 produce the same binary
has caused the Debian Bug report #828910,
regarding ftp.debian.org: tidy and tidy-html5 produce the same binary
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
828910: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=828910
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: ftp.debian.org
Severity: normal
The crux of the problem is tidy-html5 is suppose superseed tidy, and
tidy maintainer prepared new tidy package based on tidy-html5. Then
someone from tidy-html5 upstream uploaded it to archive as source package
without contacting old maintainer. The people that approve the NEW
queue then didn't catch conflicting binaries and accepted the new
package.
So now we have,
https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=tidy
I propose that the new package should be removed and old package (tidy)
updated. Or the other way around. But at least one should be removed.
- Adam
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, 28 Jun 2016 16:16:19 -0500 Adam Majer <[email protected]> wrote:
> Package: ftp.debian.org
> Severity: normal
>
> The crux of the problem is tidy-html5 is suppose superseed tidy, and
> tidy maintainer prepared new tidy package based on tidy-html5. Then
> someone from tidy-html5 upstream uploaded it to archive as source package
> without contacting old maintainer. The people that approve the NEW
> queue then didn't catch conflicting binaries and accepted the new
> package.
>
> So now we have,
>
> https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=tidy
>
> I propose that the new package should be removed and old package (tidy)
> updated. Or the other way around. But at least one should be removed.
The first resort in this case is to see if the maintainers of the two packages
can come to an agreement (usually in such cases either one bows out or they
agree to co-maintain it). Assuming agreement is reached, then file an rm bug
for the one to be removed. I think an ftp.d.o bug is premature.
Scott K
--- End Message ---
