Hi Roger,
On 12/06/2012 01:15 PM, Roger Leigh wrote:
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 02:25:45PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 03:17:11PM +0100, Roland Stigge wrote:
On 12/05/2012 03:11 PM, Roland Stigge wrote:
But don't worry - it's just a minor change and at least fixes the issue
for the protocol. ;-) So others won't be disturbed by it during bug
squashing.
So please consider sbuild 0.63.2-1.1 for wheezy (freeze exemption).
(Maybe Roger will override the package which is now in the DELAYED queue.)
I'd certainly want some careful testing first. Are there any corner
cases where this breaks anything? I'll review it later in the week
as I said earlier. And do note that this does not match the behaviour
on the buildds, so while it will fix things for local builds, it won't
work on the buildds until the patch is committed into git and merged
onto the buildd branch and then deployed.
I just saw this uploaded; I thought you said this was in DELAYED/5
yesterday?
Right, should still be in the DELAYED/x queue.
Even small changes can do with some level of review and testing,
which I said yesterday I would do this week. I don't think this
warranted such a high severity, nor NMUing it as I was replying
to your mail yesterday.
And I already apologized about missing your mail while I just uploaded
the NMU. (Consider that the bug was marked as RC since September without
anyone else caring.) And I tested the change, for sure. E.g. built
nearly the complete archive with it on powerpcspe. Still considering the
fix appropriate and didn't hear about technical reasons against it. Feel
free to solve the issue differently on a subsequent upload, no matter if
before 0.63.2-1.1 hits unstable or not.
So can we please concentrate on actually solving issues instead of
discussing severities of already fixed bugs?
Thanks and peace,
Roland
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
