On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 12:58:41PM +0400, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote: > > It is not (yet) in DEP5 but the patch made it in devscripts Git. What > > drawbacks do you mean? > > For example, this: > -->8-- > One drawback of the Files-Excluded method was mentioned: There is no > reasonable way to give file by file (rather pattern by pattern) > comment why the file(s) were removed. > -->8-- > It seems, that Files-Excluded field can be only in the header section > and that's the reason.
Well, considering that you had ./07/tek2ps/ have been removed from sources where exactly is the problem that you can not give pattern by pattern comments? > > No, it was not (at the time when I wrote my mail) in both places. > > Then I'm little lost in what's pending from my side. It seems, > git repo was in sync with my local repo (except from your commit 1e336a9). > > uscan changes? I was wrong in my previous mail. commit 0ad53cbac9e7e46fe1dee4df774bdcab9ba2faaa Author: Sergey B Kirpichev <skirpic...@gmail.com> Date: Sun Dec 1 18:45:41 2013 +0400 fix license fields was inside the repository and it is uploaded. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org