On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 01:50:56PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> Niko Tyni wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 10:19:38AM +0300, Niko Tyni wrote:
> >
> >> Oldstable release managers: will you accept a libarchive-tar-perl
> >> 1.38-3~etch2 upload with the diversions added, or can you suggest
> >> another fix? What's the schedule for the Etch r9 release?
>
> Introducing diversions in a point release is a no go IMHO.
>
> As the Conflicts entry did not leave room for any update, that's the bug
> that should be fixed IMHO.
I disagree it's a bug and there was plenty of room between 1.30-2 and 1.38-2.
But never mind that.
As we can only update the Lenny Conflicts entry for 5.0.3, that leaves
broken upgrades from Etch r9 to Lenny 5.0.{0,1,2}. Is this really acceptable?
Is it possible to remove 1.38-3~etch1 from oldstable-proposed-updates?
Even if it can't be re-uploaded with a lower version number, leaving
this small security fix (it was not worth a DSA) out of the oldstable
update altogether would be preferrable to the breakage IMO.
> It's mentioned in the TODO.
Thanks.
--
Niko Tyni nt...@debian.org
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
