Re: ia64/hppa porter NMUs for woody
On Sat, 14 Jul 2001, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> The section that I read was in 8.2.1 "When to do a source NMU if you are a
> porter":
>
> "Again, the situation varies depending on the distribution they are uploading
> to. Crucial fixes (i.e., changes need to get a source package to compile for a
> released-targeted architecture) can be uploaded with no waiting period for the
> `frozen' distribution."
Ups, yes I missed this.
> So I was led to the conclusion that this is acceptable for frozen packages. I
> don't entirely agree with this (I think that one day at least would be
> reasonable), but it is my interpretation of what is written.
It's written in a document that says of itself:
<-- snip -->
Furthermore, this document is _not an expression of formal policy_.
It contains documentation for the Debian system and generally
agreed-upon best practices. Thus, it is what is called a
``normative'' document.
<-- snip -->
Is it really one of the "generally agreed-upon best practices" to do a NMU
for an architecture immediately without waiting two hours for the answer
of the maintainer when it isn't even clear that this architecture will be
in the next release?
cu
Adrian
--
Get my GPG key: finger bunk@debian.org | gpg --import
Fingerprint: B29C E71E FE19 6755 5C8A 84D4 99FC EA98 4F12 B400
Reply to: