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

Bug#704520: marked as done (RM: midgard2-core/10.05.7.1-1 php5-midgard2/10.05.7-1)

Your message dated Fri, 19 Apr 2013 20:19:25 +0100
with message-id <20130419191925.GA7325@lupin.home.powdarrmonkey.net>
and subject line Re: Bug#704520: RM: midgard2-core/10.05.7.1-1 php5-midgard2/10.05.7-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #704520,
regarding RM: midgard2-core/10.05.7.1-1 php5-midgard2/10.05.7-1
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.)


-- 
704520: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=704520
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: rm

Hi dear Release Team, hi dear midgard2-core and php5-midgard2 maintainers,

as explained in http://bugs.debian.org/677795#67 , I think midgard2-core
(and it's only build-rdep, php5-midgard2) should get removed from
testing:

> As I read it, the package had several packaging-related issues
> "summing up" to that serious bug, filed two weeks before the freeze.
> Since then, in September, a package supposedly fixing these issues has
> been uploaded and queued in NEW [0]; it hasn't been liberated from NEW
> yet. From here, I see three ways forward: 
> 
> a) a new package enters unstable, and then Wheezy, but that seems
>    unlikely;
> b) midgard2-core and php5-midgard2 are removed from Wheezy, thereby
>    removing the RC bug.
> c) that bug either gets downgraded to non-RC severity, or tagged
>    wheezy-ignore by the release team.
> 
> As I think the concerns originally leading to the severity of that bug
> are correct, I would rather be of the opinion to drop the two
> packages.

As you see, I think that as this point, b) is the only reasonable
choice.

Cheers,

OdyX

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 7.0
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'testing-proposed-updates'), (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'stable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 3.2.0-4-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=fr_CH.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_CH.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 02:31:06PM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
> user release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
> usertags 677795 + wheezy-will-remove
> thanks
> 
> On 2013-04-02 13:13, Didier Raboud wrote:
> > Package: release.debian.org
> > Severity: normal
> > User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
> > Usertags: rm
> > 
> > Hi dear Release Team, hi dear midgard2-core and php5-midgard2 maintainers,
> > 
> > as explained in http://bugs.debian.org/677795#67 , I think midgard2-core
> > (and it's only build-rdep, php5-midgard2) should get removed from
> > testing:
> > 
> >> As I read it, the package had several packaging-related issues
> >> "summing up" to that serious bug, filed two weeks before the freeze.
> >> Since then, in September, a package supposedly fixing these issues has
> >> been uploaded and queued in NEW [0]; it hasn't been liberated from NEW
> >> yet. From here, I see three ways forward: 
> >>
> >> a) a new package enters unstable, and then Wheezy, but that seems
> >>    unlikely;
> >> b) midgard2-core and php5-midgard2 are removed from Wheezy, thereby
> >>    removing the RC bug.
> >> c) that bug either gets downgraded to non-RC severity, or tagged
> >>    wheezy-ignore by the release team.
> >>
> >> As I think the concerns originally leading to the severity of that bug
> >> are correct, I would rather be of the opinion to drop the two
> >> packages.
> > 
> > As you see, I think that as this point, b) is the only reasonable
> > choice.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > 
> > OdyX
> > 
> > [...]
> 
> We have not accepted new (binary) packages in Wheezy for quite a while.
>  So option a) is indeed very unlikely.
> 
> As it is, I am inclined to agree with OdyX's observations, so I am
> tagging the bug as will-remove for now.

So am I, removal hint added.


-- 
Jonathan Wiltshire                                      jmw@debian.org
Debian Developer                         http://people.debian.org/~jmw

4096R: 0xD3524C51 / 0A55 B7C5 1223 3942 86EC  74C3 5394 479D D352 4C51

<directhex> i have six years of solaris sysadmin experience, from
            8->10. i am well qualified to say it is made from bonghits
			layered on top of bonghits

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


--- End Message ---
Reply to: