2013/5/28 Torquil Macdonald Sørensen <[email protected]>: > Btw, your second point (regarding dh) is something we had planned. But even > though the package has potential for improvement in several places, my > personal plan was to not do everything at once, in order to prevent several > problems appearing simulaneously. The name change in addition to inclusion > of the NMU in the changelog was enough of a worry for me at the moment :-)
I usually use the same schema for "large" and "difficult" packages: sequential upload of changes instead of one upload, which breaks everything. > But if someone more experienced could help I would be glad to work on more > improvements simultaneously. Actually, I have been doing some work on moving > it to dh locally, but thought I would delay it until after the change of > name has gone through without too many problems. Push even intermediate work into git (separate branch). > Regarding the change of name, I don't really have a strong opinion on the > matter. Replacing mpich2 with a good mpich3 package in Debian is my main > goal right now. I think Yvan's opinion is reasonable. It is better to follow upstream's numbering. Cheers, Anton -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CALF6qJ=xwr+9Ai2REjCP_45cYsXuMVo0FLda=y-n-vh2d1q...@mail.gmail.com
