perl 5.10 transition, NMUs and release goals
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Damyan Ivanov wrote:
> > Anyway, it looks like the binNMU plan is still good, and a patch/NMU
> > campaign of the relatively few 'perl-5.10-transition' bugs on  would
> > make it even better. Any takers?
> There are still 109 ftbfs-rmdir bugs. An NMU campaign can take them off
> quite quickly. However, I feel a bit uncomfortable doing NMUs for bugs
> of severity 'important' when the bugs are not even associated with a
> release goal.
>  I am thinking about automating the gory details
>  http://release.debian.org/lenny/goals.txt
> Wouldn't the release team be pissed if the perl5.10 transition is done
> without them be aware if it?
Just inform them. Doing so by ccing email@example.com.
IMO the NMU campaign is fully justified. An NMU campaign preparing the
python transition has been done, I see no reason to not do the same for
Can someone of the release team acknowledge this? The transition to
perl5.10 is in preparation since quite some time and the package has
been maturing in experimental. IMO the "release goal" status can be
granted to allow for easy NMU of the 109 package that remain to be
See http://wiki.debian.org/Perl5.10Transition for more info. There's a
link to the usertagged bugs.
Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch :