Re: libpam-systemd [Re: Being part of a community and behaving]
On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 03:52:39PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Nov 2014, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > I assume that RC bug was one blocker from the systemd maintainers'
> > POV, but that bug doesn't seem to have been considered by the
> > technical committee in its deliberations at all (at least in so far as
> > Steve as systemd-shim maintainer is distinct from Steve as tech-ctte
> > member).
> We actually discussed this in the bug log.[1]
I was presuming Steve was speaking with his systemd-shim maintainer
hat on for that email. Filing an RC bug doesn't help users of unstable,
only users of testing (and hence stable); the systemd maintainers may
have wanted to protect systemd users tracking unstable from systemd-shim
breakage. I didn't see any evidence that they thought marking that bug
as RC addressed their concerns.
> An RC bug against
> systemd-shim is the appropriate technical means of making sure that a
> buggy systemd-shim is not allowed into the release.
That's true in theory; in practice, systemd-shim wasn't removed from
testing despite having a grave bug in the month leading up to the freeze,
so anyone running unstable or testing would still have been hit by the
bug until the fix made it through.
If the bug hadn't been fixed and the release team tried removing
systemd-shim from jessie, I'd presume the tech ctte would've overruled
the RC-ness of the bug anyway.
Cheers,
aj
Reply to: