--- Begin Message ---
- To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
- Subject: unblock: user-manager/4:5.8.5-2
- From: Maximiliano Curia <maxy@debian.org>
- Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 10:50:14 +0200
- Message-id: <149060461449.13738.6991097797713967275.reportbug@amadeus.gnuservers.com.ar>
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Dear release team,
KDE Plasma 5.8 is an LTS release that I consider fit to be updated in stretch.
This particular request is for user-manager 5.8.5.
The fixes included in the user-manager 5.8.5 release are:
translation updates
2 bug fixes:
+ Hide "automatic login" button in UserAccounts since is does absolutely
nothing (4761ae3) KDE#363058
This is fixed in 5.9
+ Revert "Do not ask for root permissions when it's unnecessary" (f2c69db)
KDE#373276
This broke adding new users when not setting realname or adminflag (i.e.
at present there is no way to create a !admin user at all).
On the Debian side there are no changes worth mentioning.
I'm attaching the full debdiff, the gitlogs of the upstream changes.
Currently the version 4:5.8.5-1 is in experimental, and I'll upload the
4:5.8.5-2 version to unstable if this gets approved.
Please unblock package user-manager
Happy hacking,
unblock user-manager/4:5.8.5-2
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 9.0
APT prefers unstable-debug
APT policy: (500, 'unstable-debug'), (500, 'testing-debug'), (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable'), (50, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386, armhf
Kernel: Linux 4.9.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Maximiliano Curia:
> Control: tag -1 - moreinfo
>
> [...]
>
>> Ack, please go ahead.
>
> Thanks, uploaded and already built in all the release architectures.
>
Unblocked, thanks.
>> Next time, please consider excluding the translations from the debdiff
>> (filterdiff -x '**/*.po') as it would have made the review a lot easier.
>
> Thanks for the tip. Would you prefer having both the full debdiff and
> the poless debdiff or just the second?
>
> Happy hacking,
Just the poless one (with a mention of the filtering).
Thanks,
~Niels
--- End Message ---