Hi Release team, thanks for the release! Am Sonntag, den 05.05.2013, 02:16 +0100 schrieb Adam D. Barratt: > As for Squeeze, we'd ask that you co-ordinate particularly large > transitions or changes; if your plans involve major toolchain changes or > otherwise have the potential to cause problems in unstable for a long > time (e.g. due to FTBFS issues), please talk to us. We know that there > are a large number of changes which have been waiting for the release to > happen and we're keen not to stand in the way of those but would also > like to avoid a number of larger transitions becoming entangled. The Haskell team has staged the newest version of GHC (7.6.3) together with lots of library upgrades in experimental, but we’d like to move out of that ghetto as soon as possible. The transition is mostly self-contained and, due to the testing in experimental, already consistent and complete (besides possible build failures on other arches; I only did the binNMUs in experimental on amd64 and i386 to spare buildd resources). Can we get a green light for moving to unstable here? Greetings, Joachim -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner Debian Developer nomeata@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C JID: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part