Hi Adam,
> > Best case scenario for me is that I upload what I proposed in
> > #857746; I mean, it was seemingly approved before and the issues are
> > still outstanding.
>
> There isn't necessarily a 1:1 mapping between changes that would be
> approved for an unblock during freeze and changes
retitle 857746 pu: package redis/3:3.2.6-1
tags 857746 = stretch
user release.debian@packages.debian.org
usertags 857746 = pu
thanks
Hi,
On Sun, 2018-02-25 at 18:14 +, Chris Lamb wrote:
> Hi Adam,
>
> > Ah, I think I got confused by the bugs - I meant #880474. I assumed
> > that you
Hi Adam,
> Ah, I think I got confused by the bugs - I meant #880474. I assumed
> that you were looking at getting the service fix included, rather than
> the whole of the upstream releases.
>
> Before we both get any more confused, which of the above were you
> actually requesting?
Good idea!
On Sun, 2018-02-25 at 17:54 +, Chris Lamb wrote:
> Hi Adam,
>
> > > Do I need to re-upload?
> >
> > If you want to fix #857746 in stretch (which I assume is the
> > overall
> > goal) then yes, that'll need to go through proposed-updates with a
> > release.d.o p-u bug
>
> I don't quite
Hi Adam,
> > Do I need to re-upload?
>
> If you want to fix #857746 in stretch (which I assume is the overall
> goal) then yes, that'll need to go through proposed-updates with a
> release.d.o p-u bug
I don't quite follow I'm afraid - I would simply be re-filing #857746
with the exact same
Hi Adam,
> > What am I missing? :)
> #857855, which was RC at the time and (at least according to the
> metadata) a regression relative to the package that was already in
> stretch.
Huh, okay. Can you recommend the best way forward at this point? Mark
the bug as notfound in the stretch version?
6 matches
Mail list logo
