On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 08:00:37PM +0000, Bart Martens wrote: > On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 02:59:14PM +0000, Dominic Hargreaves wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 06:37:12AM +0000, Bart Martens wrote: > > > I suggest to implement the following instead : > > > > I understand your proposal, but it feels like overkill to me. > > It's some work once, but afterwards PTS automatically follows any future > debian-policy version changes, so I think it's worth it.
Right, that part of it makes sense, but I don't think there's any need to track more than debian-policy in unstable. I'm not volunteering to implement that, though :) > > I'm not > > convinced there's really anything special about 3.9.4 than any other > > version of policy w.r.t the freeze. > > I don't see anything special there either. > > > Russ, in his 3.9.4 announcement, > > reminded us not to gratuitously update the S-V of a package during > > the freeze (and he did mention 3.9.4 there) > > I think he meant that doing uploads and requesting unblocks just to bump the > standards-version is not so useful. > > > but wouldn't the same apply > > to a package that currently had 3.9.2? > > I agree with that. > > > A gratuitous bump to 3.9.3 > > wouldn't make any sense for a package targetted at wheezy. > > I agree about "a gratuitous bump". About "a bump" however, I think that > fixing > RC bugs combined with bumping the standards-version without further changes is > not wrong. It's not wrong that PTS suggests to bump the standards-version, > regardless of the freeze. > > > > > How about a simpler modification to the current template: > > > > The package should be updated to follow the last version of Debian Policy > > (Standards-Version <first three version parts of policy version> instead > > of > > <package's standards version>). We recommend that such changes do not > > take place during a freeze for packages targetted at the testing > > distribution. > > I prefer short messages on the PTS. If we want the PTS to stop suggesting to > bump the standards-version during the freeze, then the messages should be > hidden during the freeze. Maybe we can do that automatically. Do we have > some > indicator on quantz that Debian is in freeze ? I don't think the current advice is different to other PTS notices such as new upstream versions and patch incorporation; they would often not be appropriate during a freeze. A global reminder of the freeze and not blindly following the advice of the PTS wouldn't do any harm, though. -- Dominic Hargreaves | http://www.larted.org.uk/~dom/ PGP key 5178E2A5 from the.earth.li (keyserver,web,email) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
