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

Bug#625449: Permanent BSP patch



Le mercredi, 4 mai 2011 11.40:18, Neil McGovern a écrit :
> On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 06:57:13AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > Le Tue, May 03, 2011 at 09:22:46PM +0100, Neil McGovern a écrit :
> > > Yes. If a maintainer is taking more that for a *RC* bug fix, then they
> > > *should* keep the buglog updated with status.
> > 
> > Talking about the GCC 4.6 “*RC bugs*”, I got one other report telling
> > that Debian's GCC 4.6.1 will introduce more failures.  Then why do we
> > need to act in emergency and fix all the 4.6.0 bugs within 7 days ? 
> > Can't you tolerate us to collate both transitions, without having to put
> > placeholders bugs in the BTS ?
> 
> No. You don't need to fix all the bugs in 7 days, you need to at least
> respond to it though.

The proposed wording doesn't imply this IMHO; I read it as "if you can't find 
an action from the maintainer on the buglog in the last 7 days, you can 0-day 
NMU".

What we want is more something along the lines of "If the bug is older than 7 
days without any maintainer activity /at all/, you can 0-day NMU".

I don't think we can expect maintainers to ping their RC bugs on a weekly 
basis, just to repeat "I'm working on a proper fix, it takes time, don't NMU 
please". Perhaps we need a "willfix" or "dont-nmu-please" tag…

-- 
OdyX

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: