On Mon, 18 Jul 2005, Santiago Vila wrote: > On Mon, 18 Jul 2005, Steve Langasek wrote: > > In this context, woody->sarge transition packages are just one > > form of useless cruft that we should strive to get rid of before > > the etch release. They're not the biggest source of cruft, but on > > the other hand they are (IMHO) one of the sources for which the > > proper course of action is clearest. > > In such case, could we please codify that in policy?
Surely the release manager's decision on the matter when properly publisized is information enough? Don Armstrong -- Tell me something interesting about yourself. Lie if you have to. -- hugh macleod http://www.gapingvoid.com/archives/batch20.php http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]