On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 07:22:30AM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
*sigh*
> For the record:
> Feb 6th: SRM sends mail to ftp-master trying to negotiate a timeline
> Mar 5th: SRM sends another mail since nobody replied to the old one
> Mar 5th: aj complains that nobody answered his mail from Feb 22 about
> modificating proposed-updates
So, really the timeline is:
Dec 14th, 2.6.8 and 2.4.27 advisories get released, the first
kernel updates for sarge
Dec 17th, 3.1r1 gets released
Dec 20th, 3.1r1 gets announced
Jan 20th, DSA-946-1 is released for sudo, breaking the buildds,
and introducing critical bugs 349196, 349549, 349587, 349729
Feb 6th, Joey mails indicating he'd like to release the update
at the end of Feb (27th/28th) or a little bit later at
the end of February. "let me know if this is ok for
you - or if this is not ok for you"
Feb 22nd, I mail both Joey (as SRM) and the security team noting the
queue changes that should happen "with a stable update
coming up"
Mar 3rd, Jeroen mails the security team and Bdale regarding whether
the patch proposed in 349196 is satisfactory [0]
Mar 4th, I mail both Joey and the security team again, having not
received a response
Mar 5th, Joey complains at not hearing anything,
I ask what about the previous couple of mails,
Joey tells me I'm not interesting in a stable update
Joey replies to the other mail
Mar 6th, I try to explain why this needs to happen at the same as a
stable update
Mar 7th, Joey posts to -vote, at which point you can see what's going on
> Still no word from ftp-master if or when the next stable update can
> be implemented. As usual, the SRM is left in vain and pain.
Cheers,
aj
[0] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=349196;msg=43
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature