On Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 08:48:15PM -0800, Daniel Stone wrote: > On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 03:50:23AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 29, 2004 at 03:22:52PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > > There was little point holding up 4.3.0's progress into sarge because of > > > it; the exact same bug is present in XFree86 4.2.1, already in sarge. > > > > > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=libx11-6 > > > > I don't disagree with that. > > > > All I'm saying is that suh a bug is IMHO release critical in the sense > > "should be fixed before the next stable release". > > Jesus christ, how much time do you want to spend on X? sarge *should* > ship with either xorg, or fd.o's X. sarge *should* ship with a > brand-spanking GNOME. sarge *should* have autoconfiguring X. sarge > *should* have out-of-the-box wireless, LDAP authentication, et al, > support. > > It doesn't make *any* of these RC. BTW - If you have a bug which you believe deserves to be marked RC you can always just tag it is sarge and sid as well to have it effectively ignored for migration purposes. As long as the version in sid has less bugs it will migrate to sarge. I am not going to comment on the particular case here since I didn't even read the bug report. Chris
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature