On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 03:35:05PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 03/31/2013 06:04 PM, Holger Levsen wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Sonntag, 31. März 2013, Andreas Metzler wrote: > >> OTOH I am pretty sure that the majority of people using wheezy's "dch > >> --bpo" functionality will be generating backports for wheezy itself > >> and not for oldstable. > > > > to me thats what I'd call "obvious behaviour" and "obvisouly sane behaviour". > > If it wouldn't wheezy's (or actually,any releases) dch would break, once > > oldstable (and therefore it's backports suite) will be moved to archive.d.o, > > which will eventually happen. > > > > Also it seems more logical to create backports for the suite one is running, > > and not an outdated suite. > > > > > > cheers, > > Holger > > Unless someone opposes to my view, I think we have a majority to agree > that dch --bpo should use wheezy, and that this really is a bug. So I > will open a new bug to ask the release team if they would accept such a > change. We typically do this through the first stable update, as the version of devscripts in unstable should default to current stable until Wheezy is released. If people would rather this happen via t-p-u and there's an ACK from the RT, I'm fine with uploading such a change. Cheers, -- James GPG Key: 4096R/331BA3DB 2011-12-05 James McCoy <jamessan@debian.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature