Hi Jeroen and Vincent, Thanks for your concrete answers to my questions.
If people want to keep discussing security issues of sage feel free to do so but please do it in a different thread. I would like this thread to focus on my initial question and not get cluttered by related discussions. On Thursday, 14 September 2017 18:51:59 UTC+2, vdelecroix wrote: > > On 13/09/2017 15:28, Maarten Derickx wrote: > > So the main questions: do we consider an optional package not building, > not > > passing it's own testsuite or causing sage to have doctest failures a > bug? > > I do. And as well for me it is the frontier between optional and > experimental packages. > > > In the other thread it was mentioned that patchbot failures should be > > considered blocker status defects (at least if the failures is not due > to a > > buggy patchbot/patchbot on an unsupported platform). Does this also hold > > for optional packages? > > It does for me. > > Vincent > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
