Re: RFS: squidguard (updated package, RC bug fix)
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 08:06:55PM +0200, Joachim Wiedorn wrote:
> Sven Hoexter <email@example.com> wrote on 2011-05-29 18:52:
> > * I see no reason for urgency=high here. There are no security fixes
> > and we're not in the middle of the release process. So urgency=low should
> > be used.
> There is a reason: package libdb4.7 isn't anymore and if someone want to
> install (new) squidguard it would be not usable (in testing). Can I use
> urgency=medium (5 days)?
Yeah some breakage happens from time to time. I still don't think that's
a good reason to shorten the staging periode in unstable, or is this
inflicted by this new "don't break testing cause it's rolling" mantra?
As long as it's not security relevant or we're in release freeze, in my
opinion, every upload should be urgency=low.
> There is a terrible muddle with the new Alioth.
Yes I know, and I don't like it either.
> I had looked onto the git
> repository which show us the following addresses:
> URL git://anonscm.debian.org/collab-maint/squidguard.git
> and I have thought, this is be right. But what is right now ????
> And if not, what should be the right git address (git://)?
The one you would clone as third party:
The one you can point your browser to:
And I don't know much, but I do know this:
With a golden heart comes a rebel fist.
[ Streetlight Manifesto - Here's To Life ]