On Sat, Apr 03, 2004 at 11:55:18AM -0500, David Coe wrote: > Matthias Klose <doko@cs.tu-berlin.de> writes: > > Gregor Hoffleit writes: > >> * Matthias Klose <doko@cs.tu-berlin.de> [040403 12:25]: > >> > Steve Langasek writes: > >> > The zope maintainers seem to be quiet ... Please before removing > >> > qmtest, let me separate out the python-extclass package from the zope > >> > package. > >> No reaction from Luca indeed, but Andrea is suggesting to upgrade to his > >> 2.7.0-13 package. During the next week, I'll try and see if that sounds > >> possible and feasable without breaking to much other packages. Fixing > >> the grave bugs in 2.6.4 doesn't look impossible, but then, I really > >> don't like to mess with Luca's zopectl code... > > that would be great, to have plone-2.0 in sarge ... > That's a great idea, though plone 2.0 doesn't actually *need* zope 2.7 > (it works with 2.6 as well). > I'm fixing the remaining zope 'grave' bugs, all with small changes in > zopectl. I'll NMU it tonight, I believe. > QUESTION: is an NMU to unstable with priority high sufficient to get > this into testing, or do I have to upload to testing-proposed-updates > (or someplace else) as well? Since testing has not been frozen, an upload to unstable is sufficient. It will still take a few days to propagate, of course, but removing zope from testing would be enough of a PITA that just about any progress at all will be enough to convince me not to remove it. ;) -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature