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

Re: freeze and testing and libgcc1 (Re: proposing bash-3.0 upload to unstable



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi,

Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> > * Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> [2004-07-27 23:31]:
> > > If you feel it only justifies an urgency=medium upload, then that's
> > > what I would recommend.  This means it probably won't make the
> > > freeze, since medium is 5 days and the 31st is 4 days from now, but
> > > those are the breaks.
> > 
> > I think the 31st should apply to uploads to unstable rather than
> > testing.  You basically came with your freeze announcement completely
> > out of the blue and said testing will freeze in 6 days, not giving
> > maintainers any chance at all to make normal uploads which take 10
> > days to propogate to testing.  This could lead to a) packages being
> > uploaded in a rush even tough they are not well tested and b) them
> 
> a problem I see *NOW* is that gcc-3.3 and gcc-3.4 (libgcc1 where all new
> stuff is built against) were uploaded with urgency high and therefore
> could make the freeze but gtk+2.0 was some days before with _low_ and it
> is now only 3/10 days old.

And now gtk+2.0 (on which the gcc-3.4 sourcepkg - libgcj5-awt - depends)
is 1/5 days old *and depends on the libtiff transition*.

grmbl.

Grüße/Regards,

René
- -- 
 .''`.  René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer
 : :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/
 `. `'  rene@debian.org | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73
   `-   Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB  7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73
      
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBCtp2+FmQsCSK63MRAv/vAJ9wiVnIEJ3yZ3f6dyPUrGVjVIYwzgCcC9WS
2R9KB2Jc9+0gEdkiWvY2Aao=
=3C6M
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Reply to: