Re: glib destabilization and ways forward
On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 08:11:14PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Friday 29 December 2006 19:48, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > Note that option (3) depends on upstream's ability to fix the problem
> > quickly, *and* is likely to be error prone. If our priority is the
> > *release*, then options (1) and (2) are the best choices.
> I miss an analysis of what other packages are involved in this plan. If
> only GnuCash is involved that'd make the lower ranked options more of an
> option than if the number of affected packages is unknown or expected to
> be large.
The number of affected packages is unknown. AFAIK, prior to the bug being
filed on gnucash it was assumed to be zero.
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Reply to: