Re: Freeze exception request for xfsprogs-3.1.3

2010-10-04 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 09:25 +1000, Nathan Scott wrote: I've had some user requests for this - would it be possible to allow the xfsprogs-3.1.3 from unstable (for awhile now), which fixes #593320, to replace the xfsprogs-3.1.2 currently in testing? Unblocked. Regards, Adam -- To

Re: Freeze exception request for xfsprogs-3.1.3

2010-09-30 Thread Nathan Scott
- Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk wrote: Testing currently has 3.1.2-1. Why does the 3.1.3 upload revert all the changes made in that version? There are no changes, everything is merged in the released source tarball. cheers. -- Nathan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to

Re: Freeze exception request for xfsprogs-3.1.3

2010-09-30 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 15:58 +1000, Nathan Scott wrote: - Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk wrote: Testing currently has 3.1.2-1. Why does the 3.1.3 upload revert all the changes made in that version? There are no changes, everything is merged in the released source tarball.

Re: Freeze exception request for xfsprogs-3.1.3

2010-09-30 Thread Neil Williams
unarchive 553875 reopen 553875 found 553875 3.1.3 quit On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 14:19:25 +1000 (EST) Nathan Scott nath...@debian.org wrote: - Christian PERRIER bubu...@debian.org wrote: Quoting Nathan Scott (nath...@debian.org): While at it, may you consider #144876? Its not

Re: Freeze exception request for xfsprogs-3.1.3

2010-09-30 Thread Mehdi Dogguy
On 09/30/2010 07:30 AM, Christian PERRIER wrote: Apart from it has been this way for years, I haven't seen many arguments for this 'oddity' (maybe the word is too strong, I'm not finding another) in the bug log . oddity is not too strong, IMO. I'd have said stupidity instead, but it would

Re: Freeze exception request for xfsprogs-3.1.3

2010-09-30 Thread Nathan Scott
- Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk wrote: On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 15:58 +1000, Nathan Scott wrote: - Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk wrote: The corresponding changes to debian/control, debian/source/*, debian/compat and debian/rules have all been reverted. The

Re: Freeze exception request for xfsprogs-3.1.3

2010-09-30 Thread Mehdi Dogguy
On 09/30/2010 09:10 AM, Nathan Scott wrote: - Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk wrote: On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 15:58 +1000, Nathan Scott wrote: - Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk wrote: The corresponding changes to debian/control, debian/source/*, debian/compat and

Re: Freeze exception request for xfsprogs-3.1.3

2010-09-30 Thread Nathan Scott
- Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org wrote: The readline dependency has also been reverted. Re-opening the affected bug. OK, great - more time wasted - can you close that now please? (and add this comment below, if you really to want to help? ... thanks) Upstream have explicitly

Re: Freeze exception request for xfsprogs-3.1.3

2010-09-30 Thread Mehdi Dogguy
[ CCing 553...@bugs.debian.org ] On 09/30/2010 09:33 AM, Nathan Scott wrote: - Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org wrote: The readline dependency has also been reverted. Re-opening the affected bug. OK, great - more time wasted - can you close that now please? (and add this

Re: Freeze exception request for xfsprogs-3.1.3

2010-09-30 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Thu, September 30, 2010 08:22, Neil Williams wrote: On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 14:19:25 +1000 (EST) Nathan Scott nath...@debian.org wrote: - Christian PERRIER bubu...@debian.org wrote: Quoting Nathan Scott (nath...@debian.org): While at it, may you consider #144876? Its not relevent

Re: Freeze exception request for xfsprogs-3.1.3

2010-09-30 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Thu, September 30, 2010 08:10, Nathan Scott wrote: - Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk wrote: The corresponding changes to debian/control, debian/source/*, debian/compat and debian/rules have all been reverted. The changes that were correct and agreed to *have been merged*, as

Re: Freeze exception request for xfsprogs-3.1.3

2010-09-30 Thread Nathan Scott
Hey all, - Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk wrote: On Thu, September 30, 2010 08:10, Nathan Scott wrote: The changes that were correct and agreed to *have been merged*, as I said - one or two were incorrect, not reviewed and (Anibal will agree I'm sure) shouldn't have been

Re: Freeze exception request for xfsprogs-3.1.3

2010-09-30 Thread Aníbal Monsalve Salazar
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 05:10:29PM +1000, Nathan Scott wrote: - Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk wrote: On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 15:58 +1000, Nathan Scott wrote: - Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk wrote: The corresponding changes to debian/control, debian/source/*,

Freeze exception request for xfsprogs-3.1.3

2010-09-29 Thread Nathan Scott
Hi all, I've had some user requests for this - would it be possible to allow the xfsprogs-3.1.3 from unstable (for awhile now), which fixes #593320, to replace the xfsprogs-3.1.2 currently in testing? cheers. -- Nathan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with

Re: Freeze exception request for xfsprogs-3.1.3

2010-09-29 Thread Christian PERRIER
Quoting Nathan Scott (nath...@debian.org): Hi all, I've had some user requests for this - would it be possible to allow the xfsprogs-3.1.3 from unstable (for awhile now), which fixes #593320, to replace the xfsprogs-3.1.2 currently in testing? While at it, may you consider #144876?

Re: Freeze exception request for xfsprogs-3.1.3

2010-09-29 Thread Nathan Scott
- Christian PERRIER bubu...@debian.org wrote: Quoting Nathan Scott (nath...@debian.org): While at it, may you consider #144876? Its not relevent here, where we're discussing fixing actual bugs, and should definately not change at this stage (if at all, and I remain unconvinced).

Re: Freeze exception request for xfsprogs-3.1.3

2010-09-29 Thread Christian PERRIER
Quoting Nathan Scott (nath...@debian.org): - Christian PERRIER bubu...@debian.org wrote: Quoting Nathan Scott (nath...@debian.org): While at it, may you consider #144876? Its not relevent here, where we're discussing fixing actual bugs, and should definately not change at this

Re: Freeze exception request for xfsprogs-3.1.3

2010-09-29 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 09:25 +1000, Nathan Scott wrote: I've had some user requests for this - would it be possible to allow the xfsprogs-3.1.3 from unstable (for awhile now), which fixes #593320, to replace the xfsprogs-3.1.2 currently in testing? Testing currently has 3.1.2-1. Why does the