Re: python-django_1.8.18-1~bpo8+1_amd64.changes REJECTED
Hi,
https://lists.debian.org/debian-backports/2017/05/msg00168.html
On Thu, 25 May 2017, Rhonda D'Vine wrote:
> I rejected the package in the light of that we always want security
> fixes to go through unstable/testing to also assure that those releases
> are fixed.
The security team is already making sure that unstable/testing gets
security fixes. And Django is probably among the best packages in terms of
security support as we have been handling security updates ourselves
(not putting much burden on the security team).
So this should not be a ground for a reject, really.
> I (personally, not double-checked with Alexander) would be willing to
> accept the package for this very moment in the light of the security
> fixes. But that in no way doesn't mean that that can/will/should
Thanks, I re-uploaded the package.
> over board and just do whatever we like. We should find a way to
> approach that in a useful way; and that very much includes users of our
> stable releases, and as convenient as it might be seen to have backports
> being there as a gap closer, that's the wrong approach and doesn't help
> users of our stable releases, at all.
[...]
> So as long as I don't have the impression that the users of our stable
> releases are taken into consideration I don't think we can move forward
> with this in any way. And as long as there is the impression that we
I have already announced what I believe to be the best way forward for buster:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-backports/2017/05/msg00168.html
And thus it would be a no-brainer for stretch-backports since putting
the LTS version there would be in sync with buster.
> that, it isn't our fault that it was chosen to *not* communicate that
> beforehand, and I'm not willing to suck it up like that and ignore that
> intentional lack of communication.
Despite this plan for the future, I would like to say that the usage
I made of jessie-backports should be allowed because there are other
teams/packages who will have similar needs in the future and they should
be allowed to do it without having to ask for exceptions. Or the
allowed exceptions should be documented.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer
Support Debian LTS: https://www.freexian.com/services/debian-lts.html
Learn to master Debian: https://debian-handbook.info/get/
Reply to: