Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 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.
Was there a reason this was not said when I asked: http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2006/09/msg00315.html Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
