[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

RE: fwupd_1.2.6-1_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2019 10:00 AM
> To: Limonciello, Mario
> Cc: debian-efi@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: fwupd_1.2.6-1_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable
> On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 11:53:35AM +0000, Mario.Limonciello@dell.com wrote:
> >Steve,
> >
> >It's not headed into testing, just for unstable. My intent was no migration on
> >it.
> There's a potential problem with uploading new versions like this when
> we're frozen, though. If we have to do a new upload for Buster for a
> security fix or (maybe more likely) to tweak how we're doing the
> signing setup for Secure Boot, things have just got much more
> complicated. :-/
> Please consider this in future - uploads to unstable are primarily
> expected to be releasable.

Oh I see.  I should have realized this.
I should have probably put this in experimental then.

Sorry about that.  Hopefully this doesn't have to spin before buster, otherwise
It's probably going to mean epoch for ugly versions like 1.2.6really1.2.5.

> --
> Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.                                steve@einval.com
> "I've only once written 'SQL is my bitch' in a comment. But that code
>  is in use on a military site..." -- Simon Booth

Reply to: