Bug#679041: transition: wireshark
On Thu, 2012-06-28 at 07:36 -0400, Eloy Paris wrote:
> On 06/28/2012 04:43 AM, Bálint Réczey wrote:
> > In the past we managed the "transition" ourselves by quickly updating
> > netexpect after wireshark.
> > Since netexpect does not have too many users yet and netexpect is the
> > only package
> > depending on wireshark it seemed to be a better solution over
> > involving the release team.
> > Should we always open a transition bug?
> Last time, for the Wireshark 1.4 to 1.6 transition, we were not close to
> a freeze, but Bálint and I coordinated the transition just like we did
> this time. The end result was the same -- all packages and their
> dependencies hitting unstable on the same day.
For most of the release cycle, that will likely work fine, yes; although
unless netexpect actually requires source changes, you could save
yourself some work and just ask us to binNMU it.
However, when the freeze is known to be very close and the upload
doesn't occur until nearly three weeks _after_ the already publicised
"talk to us /now/ or your transition is unlikely to make wheezy" time
point, then co-ordination amongst yourselves is not sufficient. If it
weren't for upstream's published support calendar, there's a reasonable
chance that 1.8 might not have made it, given when the release team were