Re: Freeze exception: foomatic-filters 4.0.5
Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 11:13:47 +0200, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
>
>> Julien Cristau wrote:
>>
>> > On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 10:27:32 +0200, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
>> >
>> >> So it is IMHO safe to allow on the Debian side too. What do you think
>> >> ?
>> >>
>> > Ignoring the upstream changes for a moment, I'm uncomfortable with the
>> > packaging overhaul.
>>
>> What does make you so uncomfortable ?
>>
> A freeze is not the time to rewrite debian/rules and maintainer scripts.
I very much know this, but the rewrite was already done and tested (locally)
before the freeze, by which I got surprised, thinking I had until "late
august" to get this uploaded (but I'm not ranting, that's perfectly fine).
Not being at the benefit of full upload rights also adds delays.
>> So three solutions IMHO:
>>
>> i) keep foomatic-filters in "lenny-style", with Chris as maintainer
>> (basically foomatic-* MIA), no update towards Squeeze;
>> ii) upload foomatic-filters 4.0.5-* with the dpkg-vendor thing removed
>> but with ps_accounting default enabled;
>> iii) upload foomatic-filters 4.0.5-* with the dpkg-vendor thing removed
>> but _without_ the ps_accounting default change;
>>
>> What do you think ?
>>
> I guess I'm fine with any of those.
Okay, I'll go on with ii) and getting foomatic-filters uploaded to unstable
with the dpkg-vendor thing removed. If that is needed, I'd be perfectly fine
with a >10 days delay before the transition.
I'll reply to this thread when the upload is done.
Thanks for your time for this review !
OdyX
Reply to: