micro release exception for LibreOffice

[Kees Cook]

On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 10:58:26PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Replying to Kees' answer, as I didn't get Sebastien's answer.
> 
> Kees Cook [2012-06-13 13:13 -0700]:
> > On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 10:05:03PM +0200, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> > > - we have regression in precise and some unfixed data loss bugs
> > > - we have a SRU ready to address those (new upstream point release)
> > > - the SRU team is not wanting to review that update since we don't
> > > have SRU rules compliant tracking for every single commit in the
> > > update and they suggested to apply for MRE
> 
> If that is the only reason why it's not accepted, then I think it
> should be accepted. The SRU team did accept LibO microreleases in the
> past, but judging case by case, not by a MRE.
> 
> As I pointed out in my other reply, and Kees seems to agree, it is
> premature to grant an MRE for LibO given it's (for SRU standards)
> rather poor SRU history. Bjoern said that future releases should
> behave better, so let's give it a chance to prove itself.

It was pointed out to me that this "get some history of good SRUs"
isn't actually part of the documented process:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates/MicroReleaseExceptions

Should we explicitly mention this? Otherwise it seems like this isn't
really what MREs were for. I.e. an MRE is being requested to expressly
bypass the SRU review process, not because it has a strong update history
in Ubuntu, but because it has strong upstream quality controls.

Either way, I think it's important to have someone from the SRU team
speak up in support/rejection of a proposed MRE.

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook