Re: Accepted bash 4.2-4wheezy0.1 (source all amd64)
On Thu, 2012-12-27 at 20:37 +0100, Nicolas Boulenguez wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 07:29:30AM +0000, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > On 27.12.2012 00:47, Nicolas Boulenguez wrote:
> > > bash (4.2-4wheezy0.1) testing; urgency=low
[...]
> > However, was this upload discussed with anyone on the Release Team
> > in advance? If it was, they should have told you to use a different
> > version number, for one thing... :) (If it wasn't, it should have
> > been; see dev-ref.)
>
> It was not.
It's been pointed out to me that dev-ref's coverage of tpu actually
isn't as helpful as I thought, so I may have been slightly unfair there;
sorry about that.
> > I see that the bug log says that the package in unstable "won't be
> > granted a freeze exception", but I'm also not aware of anyone
> > actually having asked us about that; apologies if I simply missed
> > the discussion.
>
> I was misguided to this conclusion by the fact that 4.2-5 does not fix
> a RC bug or meet another freeze exception.
Ah, I see. Migrating fixes via unstable is generally the preferred
approach, so in some cases we'll use our discretion and accept other
changes that don't directly qualify on their own but are small / useful
etc.
Regards,
Adam
Reply to: