Stephan Hermann wrote: > Hi, > > Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: >> Stephan Hermann wrote: >>> That's how I see it, too. If a new upstream fixes serious bugs, we >>> should bring it in...(not forgetting the paperwork and an ack from >>> motu-release) >> I think you misread his proposal. There's no need for an ACK from >> motu-release >> if the new release is bug-fix only. That's why UpstreamVersionFreeze was >> changed >> to FeatureFreeze, to allow bug-fix-only releases without needed the >> paperwork. > > No :) > MOTU => new release fixes bug => upload > NON-MOTU => new release fixes bug => needs paperwork => needs ack => > upload
That would be an ack from a MOTU (an ack as in a "looks ok, let's upload"), and not from motu-release as you said initially. But of course non-MOTUs need ACKs from MOTUs, but that's to do everything, as they can't do anything by themselves :) Anyway I don't think non-MOTUs *need* (as in enforced by policy) to do paperwork. Of course if they want to go through the SponsorsQueue they will do it, but that's a different thing than Feature Freeze. What I wanted to say is that we shouldn't require paperwork for something which was changed to avoid it (UVF -> FF) in case of bug-fixes-only releases. Cheers, Emilio > > > oh, s/upload/sync/ > > Regards, > > \sh >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- Ubuntu-motu mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
