Russ Allbery wrote: > Adam D Barratt <debian-release@adam-barratt.org.uk> writes: >> On Sun, 2006-12-03 at 11:15 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: >>> Adam D Barratt <debian-release@adam-barratt.org.uk> writes: >>>> On Sat, 2006-12-02 at 22:45 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > >>>>> So, if that's the case, wouldn't the next step be to file a bug with >>>>> ftpmaster requesting the removal of the 64-bit builds of the old >>>>> version of lilypond from testing, after which the new lilypond would >>>>> propagate to testing automatically since it would no longer be >>>>> breaking those architectures? > >>>> s/file a bug with ftpmaster/mail debian-release/ :) > >>> Oh, I thought ftp-master had to do that. Thank you for the correction! > >> ftp-master (at least directly) handle removals from unstable and >> experimental. They may well end up involved in removals from other >> suites (particularly stable) but generally acting on the request of the >> relevant release team or providing tools to allow them to manage things >> themselves. > >> As a rule of thumb, if it (solely) affects testing you want to be >> talking to the release team to start with. > > Aha. > > Although in this particuliar case, I believe the binaries would have to be > removed from unstable as well, or otherwise testing propagation wouldn't > pick up the package because it would be out of date on some platforms. Indeed, you want to contact ftp-master for this kind of removals. The Release Team will in these matter only remove packages from testing on all architectures or force a package in testing which could break things on some architectures (which is of course not recommended). Cheers Luk -- Luk Claes - http://people.debian.org/~luk - GPG key 1024D/9B7C328D Fingerprint: D5AF 25FB 316B 53BB 08E7 F999 E544 DE07 9B7C 328D
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature