-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> Could someone remind me the purpose of this distinction? Why should
> newer, buggier packages be given a later freeze time?
>
Because nothing else can possibly depend on them. Whereas with current
packages, if you upgrade package x that package y
On Sat, 2007-09-08 at 00:50 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Saturday 08 September 2007 00:40, Scott Ritchie wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-08-31 at 23:00 +0200, Michael Bienia wrote:
> > > On 2007-08-31 00:12:41 -0700, Scott Ritchie wrote:
> > > > On this note, I got completely confused by the deadline
On Saturday 08 September 2007 00:40, Scott Ritchie wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-08-31 at 23:00 +0200, Michael Bienia wrote:
> > On 2007-08-31 00:12:41 -0700, Scott Ritchie wrote:
> > > On this note, I got completely confused by the deadline. I read that
> > > the upstream version freeze deadline was Augu
On Fri, 2007-08-31 at 23:00 +0200, Michael Bienia wrote:
> On 2007-08-31 00:12:41 -0700, Scott Ritchie wrote:
> > On this note, I got completely confused by the deadline. I read that
> > the upstream version freeze deadline was August 30th, so I planned to
> > upload my packages on the 30th.
>
>
On 2007-08-31 00:12:41 -0700, Scott Ritchie wrote:
> On this note, I got completely confused by the deadline. I read that
> the upstream version freeze deadline was August 30th, so I planned to
> upload my packages on the 30th.
I guess you mixed up UpstreamVersionFreeze and NewPackage for Univers
On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 19:01 -0400, Cory K. wrote:
>
> Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> > hi,
> > The archive admin members quickly discussed this and the packages
> > uploaded before the freeze will be reviewed (no need of an uvf
> > exception) for this cycle. Soren has updated the wiki to clarify that
>
