SRU shift report: 2020-09-23

[Robie Basak]

On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:58:34PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> I'm disappointed to see that scilab was rejected without referring to the SRU
> exception for OpenJDK-11 in bionic.  We all knew that this move past the bionic
> release would be painful, and it doesn't make sense to backport single patches
> to an earlier scilab release to support a new java version.

I didn't reject scilab myself, but...

> My understanding of a SRU exception is that you don't have to mention it for
> every SRU.  If the SRU team wants a reminder to SRU exceptions, it should be
> documented in the SRU process.

I don't think your expectation here is remotely reasonable and can't
possibly fathom how you came to this conclusion. SRU team members don't
have an encylopaedic knowledge of all exceptions. They can't possibly
have, since new exceptions are documented and added by single SRU team
members on request without reference to the wider team. If you want us
to review your upload against some exceptional documented process, it is
only reasonable that you say so and link to that documentation. This has
been the norm since before I was an Ubuntu developer.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20200925/e87b7479/attachment.sig>