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

Re: Is upload to stable appropriate?

> > I believe that a fix for this problem would meet the requirements for
> > upload to stable ("The package fixes a critical bug which can lead into
> > data loss, data corruption...").  However, before I go ahead and upload,
> > I wanted to check whether you folks agreed.
> Go ahead.


> The update for woody should be based on 4.2.4-9.1 and not contain the
> changes from 4.2.4-9.1 to 4.2.4-12, naming it 4.2.4-9.2 would be ok,
> even if it is not an NMU, or 4.2.4-9.1woody2 or something.  The update
> for unstable should be named 4.2.4-13 and obviously contain all those
> fixes.


> However, since the patch is non-trivial, I'd rather have 4.2.4-13
> uploaded for sid-addon for a while before it should replace the file
> that comes with woody non-free, hence, not for the r2 update.

I don't understand what sid-addon is.  The only reference I can find on
Google for that term is, uh, this email.

The change I'm implementing (which differs from the one in the original
bug report) is just two lines of code, and is fairly trivial.  However,
I agree that it does not need to go into the r2 update.

Thank you for your quick response,


Kenneth J. Pronovici <pronovic@debian.org>

Attachment: pgpVObGEknbLw.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: