On 20.03.2015 08:47, Stefan Sperling wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 08:34:00AM +0100, Branko Čibej wrote: >> I just noticed that we forgot to bump the displayed copyright year. >> Fixed in r1667941 and nominated for backport to 1.9.x, 1.8.x and 1.7.x. >> I also vetoed the 1.7.20 and 1.8.13 releases because of the wrong year >> ... we really shouldn't release with wrong legalese, and we already >> allowed 1.9.0-beta1 to slip through with that buglet. >> >> Sorry about not noticing this earlier, I realize we already have enough >> votes tor 1.7.20 and 1.8.13; but I really think we should pull these >> tarballs. >> >> -- Brane > If we decide to pull these releases based on this problem, then I'm > against making everyone re-run tests for this. Just allow people to > diff the tarballs and submit a new signature based on that.
Note that we do not "make" anyone tun tests in order to vote for a release; it's up to you to decide how thorough you want to be when validating a release. And yes, just diffing the tarballs against the previous version and confirming a one-character change is surely enough in this case. > Could we have a buildbot test for this kind of problem? We can add tests to our test suite, that would be easiest, IMO. I'll have a go at that. > Should our rat-report bot (which I can't seem to locate in the maze > of buildbot right now) perhaps check for this? The RAT report builder is currently turned off because it was reporting spurious failures; either because of a bug in buildbot itself, or a problem with the slave VM. And the RAT slave didn't even build the sources. -- Brane
