Zope packages

[Jamie Strandboge]

Hi,

Jonathon Riddell and I had a different interpretation of 'should' with
regard to the ZPL in your recent zope package uploads. You had uploaded
the following packages with the same version:

zope.annotation
zope.broken
zope.container
zope.keyreference
zope.lifecycleevent

I ended up deNEWing the first uploads of these (ie without the ZPL)
before I noticed Jonathon rejected them via email. I'm not sure why, but
these weren't in the REJECT queue but still in NEW. Since the 2nd upload
uses the same version as the 1st and I accepted the first, I had to
reject the updated packages with the ZPL in them. I agree that it is
better to have the ZPL included, and ask that you reupload the packages
with the ZPL with with an incremented version. Sorry for the confusion.

-- 
Jamie Strandboge             | http://www.canonical.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-archive/attachments/20100213/b049d1b9/attachment.pgp