[Thomas Goirand, 2014-02-23] > CC-ing the release team, since I think you should have coordinate with > them here.
dropping everyone else. I forgot to set MFT, my bad. > On 02/23/2014 11:58 PM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: > > Hi guys, > > > > I just uploaded sqlalchemy 0.9.3 to unstable > > Noooooooooooooooooooooo !!! > > Man, this is a COMPLETE DISASTER for me. Don't do this again without any > coordination! Jessie will be released with 0.9.X, IIRC I told you that months ago, during DebConf. 0.8.X → 0.9.X changes are not that big and I even considered uploading 0.9.1 directly to unstable. I used experimental where you had more than a month to test it. > This *will* break about everything in OpenStack. I'm just recovering > from the last upload of SQLAlchemy 0.8.x which you did last July without "recovering" from artificial limits that I enforce on all python-sqlalchemy's reverse dependencies by generating << X.Y dependency. I'm pretty sure that 99% of packages will need simple rebuild. Those who don't will block python-sqlalchemy's migration (they already have appropriate Depends line) > any coordination, yet you're doing it again. It took about 7 months for > upstream to do the switch, and during a full release cycle, I had lots > and lots of troubles. > I'm letting you know. You have just broke: > > - ceilometer > - cinder > - glance > - heat > - keystone > - neutron > - nova > - trove > - taskflow will you back this up with a traceback? (/me really wanted to say more here but will stop for now) [...] > Please revert this upload immediately (with an EPOC) and until other > packages have reasonable upstream support for it. I will not do that! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
