Hi Mitchell,
thank you for this well prepared request.
Given that this request is for a new version of what already is in main this is 
even more than we'd strictly need. Given [1] this would not even need a 
re-review as [2] isn't too old.

I actually get the feeling that [2] is clear for re-reviews but the
implication that we expect less for such source renames or new versions
from the requester is not. I'd suggest you work with your Mentor and if
you are unsure clarify with me, a proposal to change probably [3] to be
more clear. So far it seems some know and do the easy path and others
are not. So maybe clarifying this among us could help everyone else as
well?

A lot of the now good reports like testing present is an outcome of the
last MIR and great to see to still be in place.

I highly appreciate that you had the section that matters almost most
here and is sadly often forgotten, that about your plan to migrate
reverse dependencies to lua5.5 - looking fine as well.

This would be an approval at this stage already, but let me return the
favor and also do a full check (allows me to check some tooling I work
on and better ensures we are not missing something).

[1]: 
https://ubuntu.com/project/docs/MIR/mir-rereview/#renamed-or-reorganized-sources
[2]: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lua5.4/+bug/2026608
[3]: 
https://ubuntu.com/project/docs/MIR/mir-roles-and-steps/#reporter-thinks-about-the-package

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2155757

Title:
  [MIR] lua5.5

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lua5.5/+bug/2155757/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to