On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 10:22:43PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > [Charles Plessy] > > The rationale is that the 8th is "old freeze deadline minus 10 > > days", so it was not completely unreasonnable to take this day as > > the deadline for having new packages in Etch.
> I find this completely unreasonable. If someone waited that late in > the release process before uploading a package they knew would have to > go through NEW, they can not expect the package to make it into Etch. > New packages should have had at least a few weeks in unstable to allow > problems to be detected before heading for testing. > So I would recommend against moving the freeze deadline to allow > packages in NEW to enter. Yes, this is my official position on the question (dunno about Andi's, I'm replying to email off-line at the moment and haven't checked with him, but I would guess his position is similar). The only packages in NEW that I'm inclined to worry about are those that fix release-critical bugs. Thanks, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
