Consolidating the various freezes

[Martin Pitt]

Hi Michael,

Michael Bienia [2007-09-14 20:35 +0200]:
> Will there be some guidelines when a FF exception will be needed for a
> new upstream version as not all upstream projects have microrelease with
> bug-fixes only? And what counts as a new feature needing an exception
> (after FF freeze)?

Everything that does not just correct already existing functionality.
When reading the upstream changelog and the diff between the versions,
it is usually very obvious whether it is a bug fix or a new feature.

New upstream versions which are not just 'microreleases' (i. e. bug
fixes only) are subject to FF, of course.

> This guidelines will hopefully help MOTUs (as universe seems to be also
> affected by this change) (and core-devs) to decided if some random new
> upstream version will need an exception or not.
> The concept of UVF is quite easy to understand and I don't know if FF
> will be similar easy to understand for everyone. Right now I'm not sure
> if could off-hand decide if a new upstream version (one not doing
> microrelease) needs a FF exception or not.

If there are doubts when reading the changelog, then it is probably
*not* adequate for immediate upload. :) There's no harm with erring on
the side of caution and rather ask for a FF exception.

But if people think that this would be too blurry, we can keep UVF.
It's only a proposal to speed up the obvious cases.

Thanks,

Martin

-- 
Martin Pitt        http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer   http://www.ubuntu.com
Debian Developer   http://www.debian.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20070917/66e955b4/attachment.pgp