Re: glibc and UNACCEPTs
Anthony Towns <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Yesterday, glibc 2.3.999.2-10 was accidently uploaded to unstable instead
> of experimental, and on the request of the release managers, I UNACCEPTed
> it, given it was a major accidental change to a rather core library just
> as that library should've been frozen.
I'm confused by this; it sounds as if what you're saying is that if an
important package is about to be frozen, no uploads for it should
happen. Doesn't that just mean that it already *is* frozen?