Steve Langasek [2009-01-20 6:50 -0000]: > This does not fit the SRU process as described at > <https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates>. Micro-release exceptions > for SRUs must be approved by the TB, based on the presence of an upstream QA > process that provides a reasonable guarantee that the new release will be > regression-free relative to what we released with.
Please note that this is not a general request to put in new microreleases. The complete diff was provided, and we do not plan to put in further upstream updates. This is just a bunch (some 10) individual commits, and I don't particularly care whether they are called '4.0 final' or 'merge fixes from upstream'. > Which of these changes do you believe meet the SRU process's requirement to > only fix high-impact bugs? I will say that I don't think LSB test failures > are themselves an SRU justification. That was my concern as well. The other fixes are regressions from hardy, and thus acceptable in an SRU. How much of the diff is related solely to LSB compatibility, and would disappear if that was taken out? -- Intrepid fails LSB 3.2 tests on foomatic-filters https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/318818 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
