Neil McGovern skrev:
Hello wine maintainers, The latest wine was uploaded with urgency=high. A major new software release shoudn't use a high priority, so I've increased this back to it's usual 10 days. If there's a good reason why this package should be QA-ed less, shout and I'll remove the hint.
The idea is that it was already QA-ed in all the prior 1.0-rc* releases during the last few weeks, and given the code freeze, the final 1.0 release would resolve any remaining problems found in the rc series. Since 1.0 is considered Wine's first stable release, and the release candidates have undergone QA both upstream and in Debian, then the 1.0 release can only be better than the beta stuff currently in lenny.
Also, in fact, there were no functional changes at all between 1.0-rc5 and 1.0, hence any QA of the Debian rc5 release could easily count as QA of the final 1.0 release (that's only 3 days, though, but still an argument for at least medium urgency).
While I don't personally care all that much about what the urgency should be, a lot of people have been waiting for a stable Wine release forever, and now that there's finally one, they're going to want it in lenny... besides, I thought that, in fact, since it's no worse than whatever's already in lenny (conceivably, 1.0 could be worse than, say, 0.9.58, but certainly not worse than 1.0-rc2), getting it into lenny quickly would, in fact, only give it more useful QA before lenny is frozen.
But, I guess, your call.