On 2017-07-20 21:23, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 09:04:34PM +0300, Niko Tyni wrote: > > Given Kurt's earlier answer above, I expect they need a jessie backport. > > I was involved in the dose3 backports, and as of now the version in. > jessie-backports is completely up to date with stable, and wuiet.d.o is > using it. > > Now, I see that #867104 and #864906 have been closed yesterday in > unstable. > https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-ocaml-maint/packages/dose3.git/commit/?id=42aa4c43aac0357aa59d2a1b2d9d640cd5f10dc1 > > Now I'm unsure what's the best way to get that fix in wuiet.d.o. > The options here are probably: > > 1. upload to stretch, upgrade wuiet to stretch I plan to upgrade wuiet to stretch during debconf, but not before. Note anyway that going through stretch means waiting for the next point release. > 2. upload to stretch, then to jessie-bpo Probably not worth it from the w-b point of view, as we'll upgrade wuiet to stretch anyway. > 3. upload to stretch-bpo, upgrade wuiet to stretch That also works and might be faster. It means we need to try to keep as much as possible the interface unchanged to not get any breakage. > 4. asking for exception to the backports' rules and backport the fix > to jessie-bpo without fixing stretch That's probably not a good idea, as it means the breakage will re-appear when upgrading wuiet to stretch. Aurelien -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B aurelien@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature