On 15/12/2014 11:30, Andreas Tille wrote:
Hi Sascha,
Hi Andreas,
[...]
I think by waiting a certain time to see whether some QA tools have
run once or twice which is probably in a one month time frame.
Oh, I didn't know these tools also run on experimental. In this case I
completely agree!
Hi Sascha,
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 09:40:48AM +, Sascha Steinbiss wrote:
On 15/12/2014 11:30, Andreas Tille wrote:
Well, this is a misunderstanding. The QA tools are running on testing
and unstable and I would wait a bit to be sure that several runs will
not show anything problematic.
Hi Andreas,
On 16/12/2014 10:08, Andreas Tille wrote:
We need to make sure that the *release* has no bugs. If you later
upload to unstable and a bug occures you can fix the bug in unstable as
usual. But if you have upload to unstable an later a bug in testing is
detected you run into
Hi Andreas,
I have just uploaded a new version of a package (new GenomeTools
upstream version) to experimental
[...]
do you see much in the way of uploading this package to unstable as well?
You always need to outweight policy with sane reasons / common sense.
If you think GenomeTools and
Hi Sascha,
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 10:01:26AM +, Sascha Steinbiss wrote:
You always need to outweight policy with sane reasons / common sense.
If you think GenomeTools and its dependencies will pretty surely not
feature any RC bug we will probably not need to keep new versions out of
Hi all,
I have a question regarding the jessie freeze policy. In the policy
document (https://release.debian.org/jessie/freeze_policy.html) it says
that one should keep disruptive changes out of unstable and continue
making use of experimental for changes that are not suitable for jessie.
I have
Hi Sascha,
On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 11:36:19AM +, Sascha Steinbiss wrote:
I have a question regarding the jessie freeze policy. In the policy
document (https://release.debian.org/jessie/freeze_policy.html) it says
that one should keep disruptive changes out of unstable and continue
making
7 matches
Mail list logo