On Mon Sep 21, 2026 at 4:39 AM UTC, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > Quoting Jonas Smedegaard (2026-09-18 17:47:10) >> Hi Blair, >> >> Quoting Blair Nyktas (2026-09-14 15:26:11) >> > I've prepared an upgrade of rust-average 0.13 -> 0.17 (for easy-cast 0.4 >> > -> 0.5). >> > >> > I've verified that changing the desired version to 0.17 in >> > 2002_average.patch alone allows to successfully build and autopkgtest >> > rust-quanta with the new rust-average 0.17. >> > >> > I've verified that nothing else depends on rust-average other than >> > rust-quanta; it's a singular dependency path, thus safe to carry out in >> > one go. It would be more smooth if you'd allow me to do it for >> > rust-quanta. >> >> I am on the low-theshold-nmu list, indicated with "LowNMU" link at >> https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/rust-quanta >> >> That means I have already pre-approved NMUs, i.e. uploads from non- >> maintainers for uncontroversal changes like this: No need to seek >> explicit permission, just go ahead and upload without delay and >> afterwards file a bugreport with the diff of the NMU (hint: you can use >> nmudiff for that). > > Thanks for the NMU/update. > > Please note for future sake, that an NMU is done using a lower version > number and is indicated as such in the changelog entry (e.g. using > `gbp dch --nmu`), and is reported as such after its release (e.g. using > `nmudiff`). > > Please either, if you consider yourself my co-maintainer (which I would > appreciate!) add yourself as uploader, or otherwise in future properly > use the NMU pattern, modulo delay.
Will do. I was kind of avoiding the dot-number thing from an aesthetics
perspective, as well as out of some sort of habit in previous work with
your packages. I'll from now on stick to the NMU rules, and ask for
co-maintainer (Uploader) status if I really wish to avoid the
dot-number, as you suggested.
> - Jonas
--
,Sdrager
Blair Nyktas
🇵🇸
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
