On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 03:57:09PM +0100, Ole Streicher wrote: > Paul Gevers <elbrus@debian.org> writes: > > I am not sure if you are addressing me or Pirate, but indeed I am > > working on an implementation similar to what Ubuntu does (see the link > > above about the details) which will be used as unstable to testing > > migration blocker. debci is the worker, but all the policy logic will be > > with britney where it belongs. And of course I try to have a full > > release cycle to tune it. > > Will there be a way to override this for the maintainer? Otherwise I > would see the danger that a buggy reverse dependency CI test can prevent > an important update, for example if the reverse dependency uses a long > deprecated function that is now removed. You can either fix the reverse dependency, or get it removed.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature