Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi doko,
On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 18:25:23 +0200 Matthias Klose <d...@debian.org> wrote: > Please unblock gcc-8/8.3.0-7 and updated cross builds. > > This includes upstream backports to around the date of the GCC 9.1 release. > > this includes > > gcc-8/8.3.0-7 > gcc-8-cross/28 > gcc-8-cross-ports/21 > gcc-8-cross-mipsen/2~c3 > > please also unblock > > gcc-defaults-ports/1.182 > > fixing a dangling doc dir symlink for the x32 cross compilers. I realize we probably should have responded earlier to this bug, so sorry for the delay. I guess most of the release team isn't comfortable with the amount of changes you incorporate without elaborating in detail in the unblock request. Your changelog entry suggests this is more or less a new upstream version (which is not in line with the freeze policy). Why did you upload this during the freeze and why should we want this in buster? Are all the issues that are fixed upstream of serious severity (according to BTS definitions)? Having a newer gcc-8 in unstable is biting us now since several packages that we want in buster can't migrate. At least personally I have the feeling that by uploading this, you put us in front of the block, which isn't a comfortable feeling. doko, I know you are maintaining quite some key packages, so extra work is probably not what you are looking for, but neither are we and on top of that, we don't like turning down unblock request (hence the time it took to reply, at least that's the reason for me). In this case, and also for gcc-7 (hence cc of that bug) it would be great if we could understand from the beginning why you believe why we should except this. And no, I am not going to find upstream repositories and bug trackers for all the packages that we get unblock requests for. You'll have to help us making the judgment. Paul
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
