Hi Lee, Sorry for the delay. Life.
Lee Garrett <[email protected]> writes: > On 17/06/2025 16:56, Nicholas D Steeves wrote: >> Lee Garrett <[email protected]> writes: >>> On 16/06/2025 21:54, Nicholas D Steeves wrote: >>>> Lee Garrett <[email protected]> writes: >>>> >>> from lgarrett/debian/latest: >>> keep: >>> 1c797b44 Update metadata (Vcs-Git/gbp.conf) to point to trixie >>> branches >> >> I had to modify this because you added an unnecessary complication. >> Remember, the time to review must be as close to zero as possible. No >> future-facing cleanups at this time. [snip] > I see that you have removed the change to "upstream-branch = > upstream/trixie". I'd argue that we'll have to do that at some point, > because we might be pushing upstream bugfix releases from 1.4.x. The > way the commit is right now, it will default to "upstream-branch = > upstream", which does not exist. Thus any update to e.g. 1.4.2 will > fail. Wh doyou think this is a matter for argument when the Release Team has been immanently clear? They maintain: no cleanups in unblock requests, not even for generally good [future-facing] things. What you're proposing may be introduced if/when they need to be introduced if we track upstream's security-supported 1.4.x branch directly rather than cherry picking commits as quilt patches. I'm advocating for a compromise to include whatever I can from the changes you made two days before the hard freeze. Once again, the only things we are allowed to change are release critical bugs (and essential documentation) in 1.4.1-3. I'm happy to hear the rest looks good :) Cheers, Nicholas
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
