On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 12:54:12PM +0200, László Böszörményi wrote: > On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 12:33 PM, intrigeri <[email protected]> wrote: > > Peter Pentchev wrote (08 Apr 2015 11:16:34 GMT) : > >> I'm now about to ask the release team for a pre-approval for the new > >> version of stunnel to migrate to Jessie. > > > > Just for the record, this was done: https://bugs.debian.org/782143 > ? It was not even uploaded to Sid. :( I guess you mean the > pre-unblock request can be closed as it's outdated.
I think that intrigeri meant that I had actually submitted the request.
And yes, I have known for several days now that Laszlo is right, the
request should be closed, since the window for merging into testing is
closed.
From here on, my intentions are:
- close the unblock pre-approval request
- retarget the two RC bugfixes for jessie-proposed-updates; this mostly
means updating the changelog header, I guess :)
- have them reviewed and sponsored into jessie-proposed-updates
(possibly by Laszlo, if not, by somebody else)
- in the meantime, in the master branch, go crazy with many updates that
have piled up during the Jessie release freeze, including, but not
limited to:
- refresh the Debian packaging
- update to the latest upstream version (which would remove a couple
of integrated and a couple of outdated patches)
- break some compatibility shims, e.g. make the PID file compulsory
(remove the 12-restore-pidfile-default patch); my intention was to
keep the compatibility for one Debian release cycle and then drop it
for Stretch
- discuss with Laszlo whether it's time to rename both the source and
binary package to simply "stunnel" and how exactly to proceed with
that
G'luck,
Peter
--
Peter Pentchev [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
PGP key: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc
Key fingerprint 2EE7 A7A5 17FC 124C F115 C354 651E EFB0 2527 DF13
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
