Re: bug in backports that affects wheezy

2013-01-31 Thread Simon McVittie 
On 31/01/13 09:00, Javi Merino wrote:
> Assuming that it does affect wheezy, should I upgrade it to
> "important"

If you think it "has a major effect on the usability of the package,
without rendering it completely unusable to everyone"[1] then yes.

> fix it in wheezy and then backport it to squeeze-backports?

If you think the fix is eligible for release in Wheezy under the
freeze policy[2], then yes.

Regards,
S

[1] http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer
[2] http://release.debian.org/wheezy/freeze_policy.html


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/510a5632.80...@debian.org

bug in backports that affects wheezy

2013-01-31 Thread Javi Merino 
Hi debian-python,

I'm not sure how to deal with #699405 [0].  It's a bug in
squeeze-backports but presumably it also affects wheezy (I have to
check that).  Assuming that it does affect wheezy, should I upgrade it
to "important", fix it in wheezy and then backport it to
squeeze-backports?

[0] http://bugs.debian.org/699405

Any thoughts?  Thanks,
Javi (Vicho)


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature