Re: wesnoth-1.18_1.18.3-1~bpo12+1_source.changes REJECTED

On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 5:06 AM Simon McVittie <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 22 Nov 2024 at 12:23:59 +0000, Peter B wrote:
> > My understanding is that upload of source packages deemed NEW,
> > must be accompanied by built binary packages. (Usually amd64)
>
> Yes, this is the case, but I think Vincent is aware of that. The query was
> why this particular upload was deemed to be NEW, when the source package
> and all of its binary packages already seem to exist in the target suite.
>
> (The corresponding upload to unstable was source-only and was accepted,
> so there must be something slightly different happening in -backports.)

Yep, that's precisely it, I have no idea why this upload landed in
(backports) NEW in the first place. I've done source-only uploads of
src:wesnoth-1.18 to bookworm-bpo in the past, e.g. [1], that were
accepted without any fuss. This particular upload does not introduce
any new binary packages so this should've also been accepted without
taking a detour through NEW.

Ftpmasters, please let me know what my next course of action should be. Thanks!

Regards,
Vincent

[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-backports-changes/2024/07/msg00016.html