[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Processed: round and round we go

On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 04:24:46PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Yes, someone else pointed this out to me.  So you didn't have to special
> case it, and wouldn't have needed to even if I hadn't downgraded the
> bug?

I'd marked that bug as applying to the version in testing way back before
woody was released. So either "no" or "it was already special cased".

> 1) why such things are reported as "excuses" for a package not being
>    considered when they won't stop a package from being considered;

Because it's helpful to have the fact that there're RC bugs in the
unstable version coveniently available, whether they affect the move into
testing or not.

> 2) why "valid candidate" wasn't appearing in the output; I interpreted
>    the absence of "valid candidate" to mean that the package would not
>    be moving to testing

You downgraded that bug on the 27th, at which point xfree86 would've been
uploaded for about eight days -- so it would've been "too young" to be a
valid candidate.


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

 ``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.''

Attachment: pgp9bPWo17vd9.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: