Re: [SRM] updating ia32-libs and ia32-libs-gtk
On Thu, December 29, 2011 14:45, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Thu, December 29, 2011 13:18, Philipp Kern wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 12:51:23PM +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
>>> > Given that this will be the final point release for lenny, might it
>>> > worth making an exception this time and also including packages from
>>> > o-p-u?
>>> We could also consider to make it not the exception but the rule. The
>>> packages are accepted into stable afterall - so why not include them
>>> ia32-libs at the same time?
>> They're at that point accepted into proposed-updates. If we know that
>> there are problems we can ignore a package at point release time, so
>> it's not included into stable. Having it already in ia32-libs might
>> that harder. (Or we may just not care about the content of ia32-libs.)
> It has pros and cons - I would say that in most cases the chance on
> trouble with a package is quite low, but the updated packages but do have
> some kind of useful fix included (hence the stable update in the first
> place), so it kind of makes sense to bring it to ia32-libs users sooner
> rather than later. But there's certainly a more cautious counterpoint to
> be made. I leave it up to the SRM's to say which they prefer.
I now uploaded ia32-libs and ia32-libs-gtk for squeeze and ia32-libs for
lenny. I've added proposed-updates to the lenny sources but I don't think
that in this specific iteration it made any difference.
Let me know if you want me to always include proposed-updates in the
future or only for the final point release of a distribution.