Re: vim-vimoutliner to stable-proposed-updates?
In linux.debian.devel.release, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
>> the problem is http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=316626 -- it
>> is one of those "last minute before freezing stable" uploads and it went
>> horribly wrong, resulting that current Debian/stable has non-functional
>> package. I tried to persuade Joey, that vim-vimoutliner should go to
>> stable-proposed-updates, but he rejected me, because VO didn't seem to be
>> important enough for him. However, number of grumbling users of stable
>> Debian is getting higher, so I would like to ask once more -- could the
>> current vim-vimoutliner from testing go to stable-updates?
(I'm one of these grumbling users, and I bugged him to push for
Wouldn't it be better to backport the fix? I'd vote for that as a
matter of principle, and it shouldn't be hard to do.
> Stable update policy is as follows:
> 2. The package fixes a critical bug which can lead to data loss,
> data corruption, or an overly broken system, or the package
> is broken.
> I don't see any of above criteria matched here. Okay, one could argue
> about 2 here (the package is broken), but i don't see a reason ATM
> to fix a normal bug in the next point release.
Yes, the bug was filed as "normal". In reality, however, it *clearly*
is severity grave, because, well, it does render the package completely
unusable unless the user fixes the bug himself. IMO this is a
no-brainer for proposed-updates: completely unusable package, with a
simple fix AFAIUI. It's only that the BTS record got screwed up.
So yes, I'd very much like to argue about 2.
> So no, i don't see this this as a valid candidate. Sorry.
Please reconsider that decision.
PS. Sorry for breaking the thread, I'm not subscribed to d-release but
reading it with a mail-to-news-gateway. Reply-to should be set