Comments | appaji: What should be NEW?

appaji

What should be NEW?

May 28, 2008 13:10

For some reason, I was under the impression that uploading a new upstream release would place the package in the NEW queue. I was proved wrong because I was able to upload ELinks 0.12~20080527-1 to experimental yesterday and I am a DM who can't upload NEW packages ( Read more... )

new, notes, tech, debian, questions, linux

Comments 7

NEW packages ext_102062 May 28 2008, 15:26:49 UTC

NEW means new to Debian - a new package in the PTS. elinks has been in the PTS for some time. Unless an upload adds a new source package or adds a new binary package to an existing source package, it won't go into NEW.
A new version in experimental is not a new package, it is a new version.
There would not be enough time to put all new upstream versions through NEW. A new .orig.tar.gz is not sufficient reason to put the package into NEW, it's just a new version.

Re: NEW packages appaji May 29 2008, 03:13:04 UTC

Except that it isn't necessarily "new to the PTS" (because the PTS is source package based) but a NEW _binary_ package built from a source package (which may or may not be in the archive already).

Re: NEW packages ext_102062 July 25 2008, 11:19:01 UTC

If you search debian-devel's archives you'll see some discussion over this topic. Of course it would be very good to allow automatic NEW-acceptance of -dbg and new versions of libraries that change the soversion. I think the code just isn't there in DAK, so you may want to try and create a patch to the scripts, and perhaps this will not itch any longer =).

kov

debajit May 29 2008, 04:55:17 UTC

You lost me somewhere between the 13th and 17th word :-)

How have you been otherwise?

appaji May 30 2008, 06:24:47 UTC

Life is rolling, been doing a lot of things, at work or otherwise too. And then there is this full time job of battling Bangalore traffic anyway :)

PS: You are not allowed to complain about Mumbai traffic. A friend visiting me from there the other day tells me that Bangalore is way more criminal!

anonymous July 25 2008, 16:26:51 UTC

You could just as easily upload material of questionable legality in the .diff.gz.

appaji August 1 2008, 09:30:02 UTC

Except that one would tend to review .diff.gz a bit more carefully than the whole orig.tar.gz but point taken :-)