On Fri, Feb 25, 2005 at 01:59:35AM +0100, Torsten Landschoff wrote: > On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 04:34:44PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > > If it wasn't clear from my previous messages on the subject, I was speaking > > as a release manager when I approached Snow-Man about this matter on IRC. :) > > I rather think that uploading to experimental is overkill for what we're > > trying to accomplish here (i.e., fixing an RC bug for sarge). Unless you > > see some other fix for the RC bug that *doesn't* include bumping to OpenLDAP > > 2.2 (and both Stephen Frost and I have so far come up empty-handed), I think > > the OpenLDAP 2.2 upload should go directly to unstable according to the > > (carefully considered) plan that was proposed. I'm happy to review the > > packages prior to upload if you'd like. > I uploaded to experimental so that the packages can see some testing. I > know of a number of bugs already but I did not want another hack-a-thon > ;) I'd rather collect problems and fix them in the next sweep until we > have something that can be uploaded to unstable. > Currently: > - package overldap between libldap2 and libldap2.2 (remove files from > libldap2.2 I'd say) > - config file syntax change: old "attribute=foo" is now "attrlist=foo" > If you find more problems I'd like to know. Guess it'll take 2-3 > iterations until I'd target unstable. Not having access to read the packages from the NEW queue, I'd appreciate a link to somewhere I could download them from (or the svn tag is fine if you don't have handy web space). -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature