Please note that I'm also one of msn-pecan upstreams.
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 11:38 AM, intrigeri <intrigeri@???> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Devid Antonio Filoni wrote (28 Nov 2011 19:56:38 GMT) :
>> I'm busy with university and work, can you upload it?
>
> I don't think so. Given:
>
> 1. This package may be broken again due to protocol changes.
It isn't.
> 2. This happened already: Squeeze ships 0.1.1-1 which *does* *not*
> *work* *at* *all*.
It should be uploaded to 0.1.3 which *works*
> 3. When this happened, the upstream patch that fixed the protocol
> issues was not trivially backportable.
> 4. Nobody did the backport work to fix it in stable.
>
> I'd rather leave this work to someone with serious insights into the
> program, be them the actual maintainer or anyone else has enough time
> available. I don't feel I am in a position to seriously make this
> commitment myself.
>
> So I think we'll ship a custom, home-made backport in Tails, in order
> to avoid making commitments we may be unable to hold. We owe this kind
> of honesty to the Debian community.
>
> Sorry not to be that helpful.
>
>> FYI 0.1.3 is a bugfix only release.
Don't work on patches, just upload 0.1.3 version.
> I don't understand why this information is relevant to
> Squeeze{,-backports}, so it's likely I missed your point somehow.
> Could you please clarify?
>
> Cheers,
> --
> intrigeri <intrigeri@???>
> | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc
> | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc
> | Who wants a world in which the guarantee that we shall not
> | die of starvation would entail the risk of dying of boredom ?
