Re: Hurd and the archive
On Mon, 2013-05-06 at 21:47 +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> Hi Samuel,
>
> On 06/05/13 21:35, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Steven Chamberlain, le Mon 06 May 2013 21:20:57 +0100, a écrit :
> >> In that case would there be 150-200 RC-severity bugs introduced right
> >> away by its inclusion?
> >
> > I would rather say simply dropping them, as already requested in
> > Bug#704477. And as I said a fair amount of these are actually already
> > submitted as general FTBFS bugs or "upgrade libtool" bugs.
>
> If it's possible, yes outdated versions could be removed... and then
> look again at those figures. But it would need to happen pretty soon.
Add to these numbers the large amount of bug reports _with_ patches not
being handled during the long freeze time for Wheezy, see (note this
list is not exhaustive, e.g. some patched packages are in experimental)
bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=hurd;users=debian-hurd@lists.debian.org
1 serious
49 important
4 normal (1 wontfix)
2 wishlist
10 forwarded important
3 pending upload important
etc.
Let's do the calculation of the coverage percentage when these bugs have
been attended to (and the outdated ones removed as above).
Why do you expect anything to be different now compared when the freeze
happened, _several months ago_, in zero time?
Reply to: