Hi, In linux.debian.devel.release, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote: >> the problem is http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=316626 -- it >> is one of those "last minute before freezing stable" uploads and it went >> horribly wrong, resulting that current Debian/stable has non-functional >> package. I tried to persuade Joey, that vim-vimoutliner should go to >> stable-proposed-updates, but he rejected me, because VO didn't seem to be >> important enough for him. However, number of grumbling users of stable >> Debian is getting higher, so I would like to ask once more -- could the >> current vim-vimoutliner from testing go to stable-updates?
(I'm one of these grumbling users, and I bugged him to push for Sarge r4.) Wouldn't it be better to backport the fix? I'd vote for that as a matter of principle, and it shouldn't be hard to do. > Stable update policy is as follows: [...] > 2. The package fixes a critical bug which can lead to data loss, > data corruption, or an overly broken system, or the package > is broken. [...] > I don't see any of above criteria matched here. Okay, one could argue > about 2 here (the package is broken), but i don't see a reason ATM > to fix a normal bug in the next point release. Yes, the bug was filed as "normal". In reality, however, it *clearly* is severity grave, because, well, it does render the package completely unusable unless the user fixes the bug himself. IMO this is a no-brainer for proposed-updates: completely unusable package, with a simple fix AFAIUI. It's only that the BTS record got screwed up. So yes, I'd very much like to argue about 2. > So no, i don't see this this as a valid candidate. Sorry. Please reconsider that decision. Nikolaus PS. Sorry for breaking the thread, I'm not subscribed to d-release but reading it with a mail-to-news-gateway. Reply-to should be set accordingly. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]