On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 07:40:12PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 06:18:56PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 06:34:10PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > As long as non-fulfillable are treated as RC bugs the current Recommends > > > is enough since a missing abuse in sarge is then a reason for a RC bug > > > on abuse-lib also causing the removal of abuse-lib from sarge. > > > > As previously stated, unfulfillable Recommends are not RC for sarge: > > > > http://release.debian.org/sarge_rc_policy.txt > > Shrug. > > Then Jeroen's suggestion with the circular dependencies might be > required despite all the practical problems they might cause...
Or just leaving this bug at serious or grave, in order to keep this package out of sarge. > BTW: How do I correctly file such a Recommends bug then? > It's a RC bug according to your policy and I'd add the > sarge-ignore tag when filing, but Steve had explicitely stated that > only the release managers are allowed to alter the sarge-ignore > tag. > File it as serious and a release manager will add the tag? You file it at 'important'. The 'serious' severity is defined by the release managers, and unfulfillable recommends is not one of the criteria. Yes, this is not completely obvious from the documentation of the BTS, since this used to be different. It is currently true, though. --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl
