* Cyril Brulebois (kibi@debian.org) wrote: > Luca Falavigna <dktrkranz@debian.org> (22/05/2012): > > Also adding debian-release mailing list in the loop. > > Thanks, Luca. > > > 2012/5/22 Luca Falavigna <ftpmaster@debian.org>: > > > I fear your automake 1.12 upload won't end up in unstable so soon. > > > As you know, Release Team is planning to freeze Wheezy within June, > > > and uploading a new major version of automake now could lead to > > > more RC bugs, forcing the delay of the freeze or the release date. > > > > > > I blocked the upload for now pending a OK from the Release Team first, > > > you should get in touch with them to see whether it's OK to have the > > > new automake in unstable. > > Hello Eric, > > we're struggling with a bunch of uncoordinated transitions at the > moment, with extra fun thanks to an uncoordinated switch to gcc 4.7, and > its extra hundreds of RC bugs; so it would be nice if we could wait > until this big mess is sorted out before considering an additional > switch to a new automake version. Ideally, an archive-wide rebuild would > make it possible to see how many new FTBFS would pop up, and see if that > can be handled. How would one go about getting a archive-wide rebuild to test this? > I hope that sheds some light on the current situation… Sure, thanks for the details. It would be nice to get automake 1.12 into the release but it wouldn't be the end of the world. I'm actually more worried about getting ride of automake1.7 for this release (http://bugs.debian.org/648591, since I have your attention). I'll still be able to upload new versions of automake 1.11 if this upload is rejected right? > Mraw, > KiBi. -- Eric Dorland <eric@kuroneko.ca> ICQ: #61138586, Jabber: hooty@jabber.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature