Re: Question to all candidates about stable point releases
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Mar 2006, Marc Haber wrote:
> > I note that it took you 16 days to reply, and that you seem to want to
> > build a dependency between a change which is not strictly needed to
> > make a point release (if it were needed, why was it possible to
> > release 3.1r1?) and 3.1r2. May I ask why?
> It seemed obvious to me. If uploads to s-p-u are blocked for approval by
> the SRM, this needs to happen just after a point release so that s-p-u is empty
Why does it need to happen directly after r2?
Why can't it happen after r3?
Why is the SRM not informed in February that that queue changes are a predependency?
Is this a pre-dependency for the next stable update?
Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessarily a good idea.