Re: python-django_1.8.18-1~bpo8+1_amd64.changes REJECTED
On Saturday, May 27, 2017 09:01:37 AM Brian May wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> writes:
> > I remember having had a discussion with Chris Lamb who uploaded 1.9.0
> > to unstable without any coordination with the other co-maintainers (while
> > he only recently re-joined the maintainers to maintaine 1.9.x in
> > experimental).
> This still concerns me. If we decide to stick with Django 1.11 in
> Buster, how do we stop some helpful person making a NMU of Django 2? Or
> attempting to upload a 2.0 vesion in experimental and accidentally
> getting unstable instead (seems to be a common mistake).
>
> This isn't an easy thing to undo.
If someone NMUs python-django (not what happened for 1.9.0, since Chris is one
of the maintainers) for a new major version without understanding the
implications of it, I, for one, question if it's time to contact the DAM about
their upload rights. We don't generally worry about inappropriate NMUs of
actively maintained packages. I dont think python-django should be different
in this regard.
I do plan to add a small python-django annex/appendix to the python policy so
it is documented what should/should not be done with it.
Accidents do happen, but that's not unique to python-django either.
As long as there is a clear plan among the maintainers to stick with 1.11 (as
does not seem to have been the case for 1.8 in jessie), I don't see this as
much different than any other package.
Scott K
Reply to: