On Fri, Oct 04, 2024 at 11:49:32AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: > I don't think this is necessary when the .orig tarball already is in the > archive for a newer release. Which extra checks do you want to perform?
I think there is still some benefit when the stable updates are arriving very closely behind a development release orig tarball upload. For example, if there hadn't been a time lag with xz-utils, Ubuntu would* have noticed too late. > Are there really cases, where you don't want the new upstream release first > in the development release? This is also very common in the case of upstream microreleases where the development release is on a higher major version. For example, this week I accepted openvpn updates to Focal, Jammy and Noble. The Focal and Jammy orig tarballs weren't previous in the Ubuntu archive (I didn't check Debian; I checked against upstream directly): openvpn | 2.4.7-1ubuntu2 | focal | source openvpn | 2.4.12-0ubuntu0.20.04.2 | focal-security | source openvpn | 2.4.12-0ubuntu0.20.04.2 | focal-updates | source openvpn | 2.5.5-1ubuntu3 | jammy | source openvpn | 2.5.9-0ubuntu0.22.04.3 | jammy-security | source openvpn | 2.5.9-0ubuntu0.22.04.3 | jammy-updates | source openvpn | 2.5.11-0ubuntu0.22.04.1 | jammy-proposed | source openvpn | 2.6.9-1ubuntu4 | noble | source openvpn | 2.6.9-1ubuntu4.1 | noble-security | source openvpn | 2.6.9-1ubuntu4.1 | noble-updates | source openvpn | 2.6.12-0ubuntu0.24.04.1 | noble-proposed | source openvpn | 2.6.12-1ubuntu1 | oracular | source Robie * In the case of xz-utils, we also didn't update stable releases for policy reasons, but that doens't apply in the general case.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
