Cédric Boutillier escreveu isso aí: > Hi! > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 07:46:01AM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > > ]] Cédric Boutillier > > > > However, in case the transition is not completely > > > finished for the freeze, could you suggest ways in which > > > the team can act? > > > Ask for it to be a release goal immediately (if it isn't) and also > > NMU-worthy? I guess it might still be the latter, since those packages > > violate a MUST in the ruby policy, but it might be better to ask nicely > > than show up with a baseball bat. :-) > > Thanks Tollef for the input. > > I have expanded a little bit the last paragraph: > > However, in case the transition is not completely finished for the > freeze, could you suggest ways in which the team can act? Is it > conceivable to add the end of the Ruby transition as a release goal? > Would it be OK to consider Ruby packages that have not transitioned as > NMU-able in order to make them comply > to the new policy? The problem with making non-transitioned packages NMU-able is that the transition is quite invasive for each package. I've added a ack for that in the draft. > The full version is (still) available at: > http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Ruby/Drafts/StateOfTransitionNewPolicyReleaseTeam I think we could start this discussion with the release team ASAP. IMO, you could just post the current state of this draft. -- Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@debian.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature