Release management thoughts for Dapper Drake

[Scott James Remnant]

On Sat, 2005-10-15 at 16:41 +0100, Jeff Waugh wrote:

> If a few extremely volatile, impatient users find it offensive
> that we refuse to automatically sync new versions of, say, core-utils, I
> don't think we should be too concerned. :-)
> 
coreutils in Debian has only the following change:

coreutils (5.2.1-2.1) unstable; urgency=low
   * NMU during bugsquash party.
   * Update the documentation to make it clear that mv --reply=no doesn't
     prevent overwriting files.  Closes: #274705.
     Note that upstream is planning to deprecate this option.
   * Fix build with new dpkg-dev, so that it excludes the kill binary and
     manpage on Linux again.  Closes: #314713.

 -- Daniel Schepler <schepler at debian.org>  Sat, 3 Sep 2005 18:19:54 -0700

Which is basically the same as our diff:

coreutils (5.2.1-2ubuntu2) breezy; urgency=low
   * debian/patches/00_texinfo.patch:
     - Update the documentation to make it clear that mv --reply=no doesn't
       prevent overwriting files.  Closes: debian #274705 (ubuntu #13860)
       (taken from the debian upload)

 -- Michael Vogt <michael.vogt at ubuntu.com>  Mon, 5 Sep 2005 09:48:43 +0200
coreutils (5.2.1-2ubuntu1) breezy; urgency=low
   * Use new DEB_{BUILD,HOST}_ARCH_OS variables to select architecture,
     needed with dpkg 1.13 (Debian #314713).

 -- Colin Watson <cjwatson at ubuntu.com>  Wed, 6 Jul 2005 15:52:44 +0100

So a sync of coreutils would be an effective no-op, and probably should
be done simply for Debian Relations and to reduce our burden when we
come to open elegant elephant or whatever dapper+1 gets called ;)


I'm not saying your idea (continue UpstreamVersionFreeze) isn't a bad
one in the pure Release Management sense -- I'm saying that your picking
on the wrong bloody things!

If we continue UVF then we _SHOULD_NOT_ update GNOME, or X.org -- those
are the major changes that could break things.  You're picking on things
that have either not changed anyway, or changed in minor ways that we
probably want to pull anyway.

Scott
-- 
Scott James Remnant
scott at ubuntu.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20051015/2e911fed/attachment.pgp