Bug#923740: unblock: pacemaker/2.0.1-1

2019-03-09 Thread wferi
Control: tags -1 - moreinfo Jonathan Wiltshire writes: > On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 09:45:26AM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: > >> I propose you let 2.0.1~rc5-1 migrate to testing, upload 2.0.1-1 to >> unstable after that, provide us with a debdiff between 2.0.1~rc5-1 and >> 2.0.1-1 in this bug report

Processed: Re: Bug#923740: unblock: pacemaker/2.0.1-1

2019-03-09 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > tags -1 - moreinfo Bug #923740 [release.debian.org] unblock: pacemaker/2.0.1-1 Removed tag(s) moreinfo. -- 923740: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=923740 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#923740: unblock: pacemaker/2.0.1-1

2019-03-09 Thread Jonathan Wiltshire
On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 09:45:26AM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: > I propose you let 2.0.1~rc5-1 migrate to testing, upload 2.0.1-1 to > unstable after that, provide us with a debdiff between 2.0.1~rc5-1 and > 2.0.1-1 in this bug report and we'll look at that diff. That way, the > review is much more

Bug#923740: unblock: pacemaker/2.0.1-1

2019-03-05 Thread Paul Gevers
Hi Feri On 05-03-2019 10:39, wf...@niif.hu wrote: >> upload 2.0.1-1 to unstable after that > > Without a definite ACK from you? If that changes meet the requirements, yes: https://release.debian.org/buster/freeze_policy.html >> provide us with a debdiff between 2.0.1~rc5-1 and 2.0.1-1 in this

Bug#923740: unblock: pacemaker/2.0.1-1

2019-03-05 Thread wferi
Paul Gevers writes: > I propose you let 2.0.1~rc5-1 migrate to testing Hi Paul, OK, this is what Niels suggested as well (I think). > upload 2.0.1-1 to unstable after that Without a definite ACK from you? > provide us with a debdiff between 2.0.1~rc5-1 and 2.0.1-1 in this bug > report

Bug#923740: unblock: pacemaker/2.0.1-1

2019-03-05 Thread Paul Gevers
Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Ferenc, On 04-03-2019 22:41, Ferenc Wágner wrote: > Even if I uploaded 2.0.1-1 now, it would miss the freeze date by a day, > kicking out 2.0.1~rc5-1 as well, which would be quite a shame, > considering that it's almost as good as the final, and definitely better >

Processed: Re: Bug#923740: unblock: pacemaker/2.0.1-1

2019-03-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > tags -1 moreinfo Bug #923740 [release.debian.org] unblock: pacemaker/2.0.1-1 Added tag(s) moreinfo. -- 923740: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=923740 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#923740: unblock: pacemaker/2.0.1-1

2019-03-04 Thread Niels Thykier
Ferenc Wágner: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: unblock > > Dear Release Team, > > Please advise about the situation with Pacemaker. > > At the moment pacemaker_2.0.1~rc5-1 is 6 days old in unstable (it was > uploaded on

Bug#923740: unblock: pacemaker/2.0.1-1

2019-03-04 Thread Ferenc Wágner
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Dear Release Team, Please advise about the situation with Pacemaker. At the moment pacemaker_2.0.1~rc5-1 is 6 days old in unstable (it was uploaded on the day following its release) and