On Mon, 20 Aug 2012, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > The current practice is not to add packages which aren't already in > wheezy to the release. Unblocking nodejs involves adding a package > which isn't already in wheezy to the release. I'm not sure how > unblocking it would therefore be anything other than diverging from > current practice.
In all honesty, I have never quite understood this practice. What purpose does it have to not allow new packages in wheezy? We're trying to avoid regressions and new packages have few chances of creating regressions (since they're new). Of course to avoid being overwhelmed with new packages (which could create supplementary workloads later in the freeze), you should not allow them by default. But when a maintainer does the effort to argue for its inclusion, he's likely also going to do the effort of keep it in a state where it's releasable (and if not, you can always use the large stick "ok, but if anything goes wrong, we'll remove it again since you're going in too late"). Coming back to this specificic case, we have lots of users of node and some popular node-based tools (I'm using node-less myself) so I feel that it's quite unproductive to keep those tools out of the release when a part of the delay has been due to the tech-ctte... Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer Get the Debian Administrator's Handbook: → http://debian-handbook.info/get/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
