On Sun, 2012-08-19 at 18:05 -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote: > On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Adam D. Barratt > <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-08-15 at 18:23 -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote: > >> I write to fix the issue of supercollider in wheezy. Current SC in > >> testing is upstream version 3.4.5. Current in sid is 3.5.3. The > >> version in wheezy has a FTBFS bug (#674386), so we need to get rid of > >> that. Options are: > >> > >> 1. Upload a fix via tpu. > > > > Apparently this happened. Whilst the package does look sane, was that > > actually acked in advance? > > No. I was under the impression that the ack has to come after the > upload (because the rt uses the actuall uploaded package for the ack).
We'd likely ack the proposed diff and then unblock after reviewing the actual uploaded diff. > The devref even says to wait until the package has built on all archs > before notifying the RT. I was waiting for that before sending a mail. Hmmm, we should probably review that, particularly during a freeze. fwiw, britney won't try and migrate the package until all the architectures are built anyway; that's "new", as in implemented within the past couple of years - I suspect the previous behaviour may have been the reasoning behind the devref suggestion. > I went for uploading the fixes to tpu because: > > 1. There was a fix available so it makes no sense to not fix the package. > 2. If 3.5 is going to be allowed to migrate, it should be because it > makes sense to have 3.5 instead of 3.4, and not because of some > unrelated bug. Sounds reasonable. I've added an "approve" hint (effectively an unblock for t-p-u); thanks. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
