On Sat, 31 Dec 2016 16:44:21 +0100 Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 04:29:47PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote: [...] > > They now risk being auto-removed from testing. If they are indeed > > auto-removed, they won't re-enter stretch and they won't be part of > > stretch (as released stable) at all. Not even as version x... > > As you can see from the 2 links I provided in the last email, the > majority of packages that migrated during that broken run were packages > that weren't previously in testing. This is true, no doubt. [...] > I usually account and optimize for the most common case. I acknowledge > what you're saying, but it's not the common case. What you say is more than reasonable. I noticed the issue by looking at the fbpanel case, and I thought that many other packages could be in the same situation. Instead, it seems that there are very few similar cases, while the majority of the wrongly migrated packages fall in other categories. So it seems that I must be only worried about fbpanel and a few other packages... > > > And they do not seem to have one month to get their RC bugs fixed. > > I see that the auto-removals are scheduled for January, the 14th. > > Depends on the bug. Somehow I thought most of them would have until the > 29th, but apparently that's less than half of them. > 396 packages are scheduled for removal the 29th > 548 packages are scheduled for removal the 14th Ah, I see. Thanks for the explanations! Bye. -- http://www.inventati.org/frx/ There's not a second to spare! To the laboratory! ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE
Attachment:
pgpLGdT6j1UHm.pgp
Description: PGP signature