On Wed, 09 Nov 2016 14:01:13 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote: > If it turns out to be a more common problem and there are many > packages affected, then this would mean delays to the stretch release, > indeed. But it would also highlight where the real problem is - ie, > not with the maintenance of the individual packages, but with our > processes for ensuring that the right information gets to the right > people. If this _is_ a problem for stretch then we need to improve > our processes for buster, rather than throwing stuff out of stretch. I don't quite understand where all this fuzz about auto-removals suddenly comes from. The auto-removals exist since Septemer 2013 [0] and they were also in place for the jessie freeze [1], with the small difference that now the point-of-no-return is a month before the hard freeze, and in jessie it started with the hard freeze. In my experience, auto-removals before and during the jessie freeze were very helpful to keep the freeze shorter than previous ones. Personally, I'm not looking back to the releases were we spent month fixing RC bugs in packages that noone cared about; with the auto-removals from testing, they are no blockers anymore. Cheers, gregor [0] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2013/09/msg00006.html [1] https://release.debian.org/jessie/freeze_policy.html#autoremovals -- .''`. https://info.comodo.priv.at/ - Debian Developer https://www.debian.org : :' : OpenPGP fingerprint D1E1 316E 93A7 60A8 104D 85FA BB3A 6801 8649 AA06 `. `' Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe `- NP: Rolling Stones: Claudine2
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital Signature