I understand the SecurityUpdateProcedures, but it's disappointing
nevertheless to see packages in an "LTS" release have security flaws go
unfixed.
--
please backport trac from feisty to dapper
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/75895
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubu
Rejected, see bug #106095.
** Changed in: python-support (Ubuntu)
Status: In Progress => Rejected
** Changed in: dapper-backports (upstream)
Status: Needs Info => Rejected
--
please backport trac from feisty to dapper
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/75895
You received this bug not
NeedsInfo, pending python-support request. However, with this number of
changes needed to get it to build, it doesn't look good :-/
** Changed in: dapper-backports (upstream)
Status: Unconfirmed => Needs Info
--
please backport trac from feisty to dapper
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/75
Backport request for python-support from Feisty to Dapper opened. Bug
#106095.
--
please backport trac from feisty to dapper
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/75895
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is the bug contact for Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mail
According to Max Ischenko's blog comments, once python-support from Edgy
is installed, one can install Edgy's trac without having to resort to
--force-depends... Therefore, perhaps it's more prudent to request a
python-support backport from Edgy as a dependency of the trac backport
request?
** Als
** Summary changed:
- please backport trac 0.10.2 from feisty to dapper
+ please backport trac from feisty to dapper
** Description changed:
Hi there.
- Trac (http://trac.edgewall.org/) is at version 0.10.3 in feisty, and
- 0.10.2 backported from feisty to edgy:
+ Trac (http://trac.edgewall
