Re: Upload of GNOME 2.8 to unstable
On Tue, Nov 16, 2004 at 12:51:27AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2004 at 05:48:44PM +0000, Colin Watson wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 15, 2004 at 07:38:59PM +0200, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
> > > This point is self-contradictory and spells disaster:
> > >
> > > 1) You cannot have a rapid deployment with urgency=low as a priority.
> > The 'urgency' field is mostly only relevant to propagation to testing.
> > The release managers have the ability to override this field. Q.E.D.
> I was also under the impression (from joeyh, but he did speak about .udebs),
> that it also affected priority of the autobuilders in some way, that is
> higher urgency packages get prioritized higher in the autobuilder queues.
I'm not so worried about that, because the core GNOME packages are small
enough that autobuilding isn't too painful for the stuff that's really
urgent, and I don't really want to encourage the war of escalation that
is setting everything to urgency=high. Naturally, it's up to the GNOME
maintainers what they want to do.
Colin Watson [email@example.com]