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

Re: System V Code removed from XFS

On Sun, Oct 12, 2003 at 11:58:44AM +0200, Jens Schmalzing wrote:
> SGI just released a new version of their file system XFS.  Apparently,
> this was due to legal concerns because the old version contained some
> System V code [1].  My question is, how should I proceed as the
> principal uploader of the Debian package kernel-patch-xfs.  I will of
> course upload the new version to unstable as soon as possible.  Is it
> justified to set the urgency to high, in order to speed up the
> transition into testing?  Is it necessary to prepare an update for
> stable?

Well, until recently, I would have said you should use an urgency of at
least "medium" because you're fixing a release-critical issue.

However, recent events have caused me to wonder if the Powers That Be
within the project might consider that abuse of the urgency field, since
non-DFSG-free code in main isn't considered a release-critical issue by
the release manager, who also oversees the unstable-to-testing
propagation process, and would likely be perturbed by efforts to
circumvent the safeguards that are in place against packages propagating
to testing too quickly.

So, you've stumbled across a gulf between theory and practice.
Clarification was promised over a month ago but it hasn't happened yet.

I say go with your conscience and prepare to be flamed either way.

G. Branden Robinson                |      It doesn't matter what you are
Debian GNU/Linux                   |      doing, emacs is always overkill.
branden@debian.org                 |      -- Stephen J. Carpenter
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: