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

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 
Sarge r4.)

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

Reply to: