Your message dated Fri, 10 Feb 2017 17:37:39 +0000
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#854619: unblock: svtplay-dl/1.9.1-0.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #854619,
regarding unblock: svtplay-dl/1.9.1-0.1
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.)
--
854619: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=854619
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release.debian.org
User: [email protected]
Usertags: unblock
Please consider unblocking the package svtplay-dl
Well, the delta is quite small despite being a new upstream release, and
it is needed to make the package usable again.
Debdiff at
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?att=1;bug=853772;filename=svtplay-dl-1.9.1-0.1-nmu.diff;msg=8
unblock svtplay-dl/1.9.1-0.1
--
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo
GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`.
more about me: https://mapreri.org : :' :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `-
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 07:45:16PM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> Control: tag -1 - moreinfo
>
> On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 08:11:25PM +0000, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 07:05:40PM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> > > Please consider unblocking the package svtplay-dl
> > >
> > > Well, the delta is quite small despite being a new upstream release, and
> > > it is needed to make the package usable again.
> >
> > I disagree, the bug it closes specifically mentions a targetted fix. Your
> > upload is a much more invasive new upstream. Does the targetted fix not
> > work?
>
> It probably does, but
> 1) the relevant commit comes after several dozen other commits since the
> version currently in stretch (actually it happened "right before" the
> 1.9.1 release); I can't assume that just because the patch applies it
> doesn't depend on some subtle change done before
> 2) if possible, I always prefer something that an upstream says it's
> "good" rather than mess with patches, especially in small projects
> like this where that's actually feasible
> 3) if you glances at the upstream commit log you can see there are at
> least 3 more crash fixes, and I deem crash important enough to be
> fixed if possible
>
> Furthermore this is a leaf package, and even if it's true the Debian
> freeze doesn't distinguish between leaf and non-leaf or priority of the
> package I hope you can see how there is no way this update could
> jeopardize the final release.
>
> > We find packages like this are often broken by service API changes during a
> > stable lifetime; is svtplay-dl suitable for a stable release?
>
> Another version is available in jessie, and ttbomk everything went well,
> so I'd say it is, yes. Anyway, this is a question for the actual
> maintainer :)
Ok, unblocked.
Thanks,
--
Jonathan Wiltshire [email protected]
Debian Developer http://people.debian.org/~jmw
4096R: 0xD3524C51 / 0A55 B7C5 1223 3942 86EC 74C3 5394 479D D352 4C51
--- End Message ---
