On Wed, 2014-07-23 at 23:28 +0200, Sébastien Delafond wrote: > On Jul/23, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > > Package name : perf-tools > > > > Please choose a different name so that it won't be mistaken for > > linux-tools. Perhaps 'perf-tools-unstable'. > > Sure, I can do that: I'll re-upload it to NEW with another name. > > > > Many of these tools employ workarounds so that functionality is > > > possible on existing Linux kernels. Because of this, many tools have > > > caveats (see man pages), and their implementation should be > > > considered a placeholder until future kernel features, or new > > > tracing subsystems, are added. > > > > Based on the description, it doesn't appear that this would be > > suitable for a stable release. So after uploading it, please open an > > RC bug to ensure that it does not transition to testing. > > As long as the caveats/missing features are properly documented in the > manpages (which, as far as I can tell, they are), why wouldn't this > package be suitable for testing ?
If it stays in testing, it will go into the next stable and you then need to support some arbitrary version for ~3 years. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Absolutum obsoletum. (If it works, it's out of date.) - Stafford Beer
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
