On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 07:58:23PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Mon, 2010-09-13 at 18:17 +0900, Horms wrote: > > Perdition 1.19~rc4-1 includes several important fixes and I would like it > > considered for inclusion in Squeeze. As it coincides with an upstream > > release (1.19-rc4) it also contains one or two (minor) changes that don't > > strictly meet the criteria for the freeze. > > Does the versioning imply that 1.19 is likely to be released soon? If > so, are you likely to be requesting a further exception for that?
Ideally I would like to release 1.19 soon. Although I don't know of any outstanding problems, I had it in mind to wait to see if any bugs show up. If it makes a difference to you I could change my plan and turn 1.19-rc4 into 1.19. What I had in mind was that if any serious bugs showed up then I would a freeze exception accordingly. I don't have it in mind to request a freeze just to bump the version to 1.19. > > > changeset: 867:86df56cded53 > > user: Christophe Ségui <christophe.se...@math.univ-toulouse.fr> > > date: Thu Sep 09 21:34:24 2010 +0900 > > summary: Correct parsing of NIS map > > > > This is a bug that I believe is worthy of fixing for Squeeze > > This appears to be #596102 (the attribution above matches the bug's > submitter), although that isn't mentioned in the changelog. Sorry, yes it is #596102. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100914020435.ge2...@verge.net.au
