[email protected] (Aaron M. Ucko) writes: > lately.) I now have a plausible-looking draft Git repository, but am > holding off on pushing it anywhere public until I get a chance to > sanity check it further.
This review ended up falling by the wayside for far longer than I intended, for which I must apologize; however, a new upstream release (more on that below) prompted me to revisit it over the weekend. I've posted my final draft, complete with merge annotations and pristine-tar metadata, at git://amu.scripts.mit.edu/ncbi-tools6.git (browsable via http://amu.scripts.mit.edu/gitweb.cgi?p=ncbi-tools6.git;a=summary ) in case anyone wishes to review it further before I upload an official version to Alioth (probably within a week, but not for at least a day or two). To make a long story short, my caution in pushing my initial conversion attempt proved justified as I wound up having to redo it, in large part because I hadn't properly configured git-svn for the two-level branch layout I was using (svn-buildpackage's default, at least when storing all upstream sources per my preference). As for the new upstream release, I'm planning to upload it to experimental out of respect for the freeze; however, I'm tempted to ask the release team for a freeze exemption for a subsequent upload to unstable. (The previous release was a year ago, and the main impact will be on other binary packages from the same source; there are a few others that depend on libncbi-tools6 or libvibrant6a, but not on portions that change at all rapidly.) Any thoughts on the matter? -- Aaron M. Ucko, KB1CJC (amu at alum.mit.edu, ucko at debian.org) http://www.mit.edu/~amu/ | http://stuff.mit.edu/cgi/finger/[email protected] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
