Hello Adrian On Tue, May 05, 17:30, Andre Noll wrote > On Wed, Apr 29, 22:05, Helmut Grohne wrote > > > Looks like Adrian applied a patch which I proposed already in 2024^[1] but > > > never ended up applying. So yes, I can ack his NMU, but I don't know what > > > would be the best way to get this change into the repo. Should I split the > > > patch into two, one for master that modifies version-gen.sh and one for > > > the > > > debian branch which adjusts debian/rules accordingly, then create 1.0.6-3? > > > > >From a Debian pov, your git tree is out-of-sync with Debian and the > > version that is your head was never released. Whatever you do, ideally > > your debian branch includes the NMU changes in its head commit. For > > instance, you might add a branch importing the NMU and then merge that > > branch manually resolving the inevitable debian/changelog conflict. > > > > To put it another way, building a source package from your git and then > > comparing (debdiff) that package to the most recent upload should not > > revert the NMU changes unless you explicitly want to revert them and > > state so in a changelog entry. > > Here's what I did to address this: > > * Applied the old version-gen.sh patch to a temporary branch t/nmu. > > * Merged this branch into the debian branch, amending the merge commit to > add the necessary changes to debian/rules and to resolve the debian/changelog > conflict. > > Please have a look at the current pu branch (proposed updates) of the public > repo. If everything looks good to you, I'll make these changes permanent by > updating the non-rewinding master and debian branches accordingly.
Given that Helmut is unresponsive and the package is about to be removed from testing, would you be willing to have a look at my proposed resolution? Thanks Andre -- Max Planck Institute for Biology Tel: (+49) 7071 601 829 Max-Planck-Ring 5, 72076 Tübingen, Germany https://people.tuebingen.mpg.de/maan/
