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

Re: pre-approved changes: Blends metapackages



Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> (2014-11-11):
> Hi release team,
> 
> I would like to get pre-approval for Blends metapackages.  As in several
> previous releases dependencies were regenerated since the package pool
> might change due to removal of RC buggy packages and we have also seen
> packages slipping into testing in the last possible moment which could
> not be included into the auto-generated metapackages.  I for myself feel
> responsible (=know that an update is needed somebody else might beat me
> beeing faster with an upload) for the following source packages:
> 
>      debian-med
>      debian-science
>      debian-junior
>      debian-gis   (sponsored by me)
>      debian-games (sponsored by me)
> 
> These packages were updated short before the release so no spectacular
> changes are to be expected.  I also know that
> 
>      debichem
> 
> will need a new version of metapackages.
> 
> I'm not sure but expect that also
> 
>      ezgo
> 
> will need an upgrade.  The Debian Edu team has also released the source
> package short before the release.  I'm not informed whether they want to
> recreate
> 
>      debian-edu
> 
> metapackages as well.

Per dda@ mails and freeze policy and probably other communication media,
please file bug reports instead of mailing the list directly.

Without taking a definitive decision on the topic, I don't think
updating blends/meta packages should be a big issue (except if we see an
upload + unblock request every day for all packages); so please do file
bug reports, one per package, and we'll see what happens on a case by
case basis.

Mraw,
KiBi.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: