On 12/09/14 18:52, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Steven Chamberlain <steven@pyro.eu.org> (2014-09-10): >> We'd be ready for kfreebsd 10.1 to go into unstable, [...] Actually, a complex chain of events needs to occur before that happens, some of it will be out of our control (waiting for a bugfix in a build dependency), so this likely can't happen for a couple of days. Then it should have urgency=low to give at least 10 days for testing. Assuming d-i Beta 2 is planned in about a week(?), this cannot be done and migrated in time. Would you recommend that we delay uploading it to sid, to avoid interfering with the d-i release process? Or does it not matter? >> I'd like to revert some of the problematic ZFS-on-Linux changes from >> partman-zfs (a kfreebsd-specific udeb), to restore the original >> behaviour we had in wheezy. I'll try to get this done in plenty of >> time for Beta 2. > > I'm not sure I'm parsing you properly. Are you saying I should be > waiting for these changes for Beta 2? (I think so given the next > paragraph of yours.) Even a release two days from now (after partman-ufs migrates) is good for me; it will be already very much better than Beta 1, and we'll start to get more useful feedback from testers. But if I'm able to make partman-zfs changes today or tomorrow, and someone can upload it for me, it would be nice if it migrated in time to get into Beta 2, so that we can get better feedback from testers on ZFS installs in particular. Thanks, Regards, -- Steven Chamberlain steven@pyro.eu.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature