On 28/07/13 23:44, Robert Millan wrote: > 2013/7/18 Steven Chamberlain <ste...@pyro.eu.org>: >> 9.1 probably should not migrate to testing too quickly - I may file a >> blocking RC bug > > Do you still want to file this bug?
I don't see a reason to delay it's migration now. Especially as it is compiling OK with gcc-4.8. popcon shows 4 users, including me and we've no bug reports yet. And I now see two reasons for its migration to happen quickly: > I wonder if we should wait for 9.1 to migrate before uploading > 9.2-BETA1 to unstable. If there's trouble ahead for 9.2, waiting a > long time can miss the opportunity for fixes to make it to > 9.2-RELEASE. I would still prefer 9.1 to migrate before 9.2 goes into unstable, therefore we may want to hurry. > Well, currently 9.1 is RC-buggy due to security hole, [...] And 9.0 in testing has the same security issue, which we have a duty to fix (by allowing a fixed package to migrate). So I'd prefer to see one more upload of 9.1 to unstable, with the nfsserver security bugfix, with urgency=medium or high. And it should be allowed to migrate unless someone finds a serious bug during those 2-5 days. Does that seem like a reasonable plan? Regards, -- Steven Chamberlain ste...@pyro.eu.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/51f5a2e0.7070...@pyro.eu.org
