On Sat, 5 Sep 2015, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > I'm not the maintainer, but I think that it is probably cleaner to > have testing version = stable version until this bug is fixed (it
No, absolutely not. We’re in the midst of a hell of a transition, holding back packages just for fun isn’t helping. > On 2015-09-05 08:49:35 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > This just proves that you don't know how Debian works. A fix for testing > > must come via unstable not from stable. > > First, I haven't said that a fix for testing must come from stable, > just that it was easy to fix testing too (because this would be the > same patch). And no, a fix for testing does not necessarily come > via unstable: This is the absolute exception; all uploads to testing should come via unstable if at all possible. The exception is for when people used unstable as experimental, preventing migration, but there are really urgent issues to be fixed in testing. Only. The paragraph you cited allows maintainers to deviate from the normal “via un‐ stable” rule in such cases, it doesn’t make it the norm. This is how Debian works. Same goes for stable: If there is a to-be-fixed-in-stable-too bug in the package, first fix it in unstable, then (while waiting for it to migrate to testing, or even after that) fix it in stable. This ensures we don’t have bugs fixed in stable that are reintroduced in later Debian versions (there even has been a package which had this for two subsequent Debian releases, people really don’t like to see this). bye, //mirabilos -- tarent solutions GmbH Rochusstraße 2-4, D-53123 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/ Tel: +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235 HRB 5168 (AG Bonn) • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941 Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser, Alexander Steeg
