Re: python-django_1.8.18-1~bpo8+1_amd64.changes REJECTED
On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 11:16:24PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 26 May 2017, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > We discussed the possibility to try to get 1.11 LTS... it was possibility with a
> > > lot of preparatory work that did never happen.
> > >...
> >
> > Who is "we", and how would that ever have been possible?
>
> "We" is the python-django maintainers, obviously.
>
> The deprecation policy of Django features is known well in advance
> and there are warnings emitted when you use deprecated features. The
> preparatory work would have been to run all the tests of all Django
> reverse dependencies and reporting all the warnings to get them
> fixed. In this case, we would have been in a situation where a very
> late switch to Django 1.11 should have broken only minimal things.
> This plan should then have been discussed with the release team with a
> plan to upload the alpha release at the start of the freeze and the final
> release as soon as it is available.
>
> None of this happened.
None of this would have been permitted.
Your plans were based on the same "rules apply only to other people"
attitude that made you ignore the backports rules.
"upload the alpha release at the start of the freeze" - seriously?
It is pretty clear what kind of answer you would have gotten from
the release team.
The backports maintainers are now in a similar situation where they have
the choice whether or not to set a precedent that the backports rules
are optional.
> Cheers,
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
Reply to: