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

Bug#603702: marked as done (unblock: iceowl/1.0~b1+dfsg1-2)

Your message dated Sun, 09 Jan 2011 21:46:52 +0000
with message-id <1294609612.2903.15981.camel@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#603702: unblock: iceowl/1.0~b1+dfsg1-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #603702,
regarding unblock: iceowl/1.0~b1+dfsg1-2
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
603702: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=603702
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock

Please unblock iceowl/1.0~b1+dfsg1-2.

As discussed with Moritz from the security team there won't be any
security support from upstream for any of the beta releases. So I added
a note explaining that to README.Debian:

   * [a8de458] Switch to source format 3.0 (quilt)
   * [b92405c] Add watch file
   * [5a9ee07] Add security update notice to README.Debian

If this isn't deemed enough we need to remove iceowl entirely from
testing.
Cheers,
 -- Guido

-- System Information:
Debian Release: squeeze/sid
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (500, 'testing'), (50, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.36-rc7+ (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Sun, 2011-01-09 at 19:47 +0100, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
> Adam D. Barratt <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk> schrieb:
> > On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 09:22 +0100, Guido Günther wrote: 
> >> Hi,
> >> On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 10:02:45PM +0000, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> >> > On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 15:58 +0100, Guido Günther wrote:
> >> > > As discussed with Moritz from the security team there won't be any
> >> > > security support from upstream for any of the beta releases. So I added
> >> > > a note explaining that to README.Debian:
> > [...]
> >> > Just to check that we're all on the same page, having read the addition
> >> > to README.Debian, does this mean that there won't be any updates at all
> >> > to the package via security.d.o during squeeze's lifetime?
> >> 
> >> Yes.
> >
> > If neither upstream nor the security team are willing to provide
> > security support, are you prepared to do that yourself for squeeze's
> > lifetime as stable, if required?
> 
> It's unproblematic, although iceowl includes the mozilla code base, it
> doesn't face the attacks of a web browser, after all it's just calendar
> app.

Unblocked; let's hope squeeze is quiet for iceowl.

Regards,

Adam

--- End Message ---
Reply to: