On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 02:02:57PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote: > It's really a lot of work for nothing, > given the risk is really zero - it's a new command line program that is > inhert and doesn't do anything until it's called manually...
On this point, I disagree. The risk is that there's an issue with the new binary, and you end up having to SRU it again to fix those issues, and so on. Sometimes the nature of such fixes impact risk in other areas, or to now-established behaviour. Or you don't fix it, and users expecting quality from the archive get a poorer experience than they would have had the binary not been added. On the other hand, putting this in a PPA or in the backports pocket[1] is easier from the risk perspective. So I'd really like to see a proper justification of why it is necessary to put this in the updates pocket. [1] Subject to backports policy as set by the backporters team, though it crosses my mind that for the project as a whole it's probably lower risk to make an exception for the backports pocket than the updates pocket.
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
