On Thu, 20 Mar 2025 13:37, Matthias Geiger <werdahias@riseup.net> wrote:

On Thu, 20 Mar 2025 12:15, Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> wrote:

Am Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 11:19:36AM +0100 schrieb Andreas Tille:

8. Thorsten answered[7] only to the list which I do not read regularly

Sorry for the confusion. It turns out my procmail is configured to move >>emails from that list into a folder I don't check frequently. So, it was
my fault that Thorsten's message didn't reach me.

9. Thorsten uploaded liburjtag[8] 2024.03.24-1 on
Wed, 05 Mar 2025 19:06:36 +0100
with no notification of any involved party.

Waiting 14 days was understandable, but I'm not sure if replacing one
issue with another-without filing an appropriate bug report-is the best >>course of action.

[...]

Hi,

From my perspective, renaming one of the liburjtag binary packages
would
be a reasonable approach. While the first-come, first-served rule
usually applies, I believe it would make sense for the main urjtag
project to provide the appropriately named libraries, whereas a fork
should have a distinct name.

agreed.

Just FTR: I meant I agree with Thorsten here of course, src:liburjtag
was there first (meaning src:urjtag should rename its binary packages).
Unless I'm mistaken policy even explicitely states this.

best,

werdahias

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)