Manuel Prinz <manuel@debian.org> writes: > Am Mittwoch, den 17.03.2010, 13:24 +0100 schrieb Lucas Nussbaum: >> On 17/03/10 at 09:49 +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: >>> I would propose that all (or at least) most of these bugs should be >>> fixed before we actually do the switch in unstable. Manuel, does that >>> seem OK to you? >> Erm. I'm very reluctant to filing bugs that can't easily be reproduced >> in unstable. At this point, you need a custom mpi-defaults package to >> reproduce them. Also, it is possible that some of them will not be >> fixable before the new mpi-defaults is in unstable (= you can't upload a >> fixed package that works if the new mpi-defaults isn't in unstable). > I'm with Lucas here. If we file the bugs before the upload, we should be > very explicit about the fact that it does not concern unstable yet. As a > compromise, we could prepare patches, upload mpi-defaults and file the > bugs with the respective patches. (Or most of them, did not check how > complex the changes are.) That would be great. The point is that transitions suck most once they are half-started and preparing as much as possible helps to keep the sucking phase short. > This would enable to fix these in a timely fashion. I could start > doing that tomorrow night. How does that sound to you? Sounds good. Sorry for my delayed answer :-/ > As for user-tagging, we can use the old-mpi-eol usertag. Sounds good, though I don't know for which user - feel free to use debian-release@lists.debian.org. Marc -- BOFH #293: You must've hit the wrong anykey.
Attachment:
pgpdYOiBlzyWP.pgp
Description: PGP signature