Marc Haber wrote:
> > > and that you seem to want to
> > > build a dependency between a change which is not strictly needed to
> > > make a point release (if it were needed, why was it possible to
> > > release 3.1r1?) and 3.1r2. May I ask why?
> >
> > The dependency is the other way -- that change needs to happen immediately
> > after a stable update, and this is the first one that's suitable. The
> > reason I think it's a good idea is that it means most of the work can be
> > done by the stable release manager directly during the months in between
> > updates, rather than as part of the update itself.
>
> Did you talk to the stable release manager before trying to reduce his
> work load?
I remember talking to $ftpmaster 1-2 years ago about being able to
approve package to go into proposed-updates btw. I think that I
spoke with James though, not with aj - again: not sure about who.
Regards,
Joey
--
Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessarily a good idea.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
