Hi Manuel-- On 11/09/2011 05:53 PM, Manuel Holtgrewe wrote: > On 04.11.2011 15:33, Manuel Holtgrewe wrote: >> I would like to have trac 0.12 as a squeeze backport. This sounds great to me, and i can only encourage it. It sounds to me like you've done some decent investigation of the one corner case of the unit tests which failed, and even that failure doesn't sound terrible. If it's possible to document the test failure in a bug report to the associated python package for squeeze, that would be a nice thing to do (maybe one of the python maintainers could sort out the issue; and if it's a non-invasive fix, it might even be a candidate for a point release). But aside from that, it sounds to me like you've done a fair amount of diligence with the package. If Arthur de Jong is willing to review your backport and upload it to squeeze-backports, i'd say you should go ahead with it. Thanks for your work on trac and on squeeze-backports! --dkg
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature