On Mon, September 23, 2013 10:47, Bastian Blank wrote: > On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 09:47:32AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: >> Do you have a message ID for me? I'd rather try to see what the problems >> with the wheezy-security route are and how we can resolve them, rather >> than try to work around them via pu. > > <20130512113628.GA16136@elende> > <20130512200941.ga10...@waldi.eu.org>
Thanks. I've read them. My conclusion is that there are two problems: 1/ On a previous upload, someone from the security team added extra changes without coordination or reporting them back. 2/ It took long to process the upload and there was no feedback on problems. Agreed? On the first point, although I don't know exactly what changes were added by whom, I fully agree that if such is the case that's not good and understanding that it's annoying to you. I'm sure that we can agree that this was a mistake and that this should not happen again. The second point is indeed unfortunate, reading back it seems related to two different problems with DAK. I have no ready-made solution for this. The DAK instance we use is not run by us so we cannot influence the shortcomings it has, we'll just have to work with them the best we can and hope for the hard work of ftpmaster to solve issues when they pop up. I'm sure we can do better with keeping you posted about any delay, and I hope you would ping us (on irc for example) if you expected a response but it's not there yet. Given the limitations of tools and manpower and the large number of issues that we need to deal with, the process will probably never be perfect. But I hope that when a bumb arises we can just talk directly on irc to avoid misunderstandings and frustraction. Do you think we could just try to start anew? In the end it benefits our users most if Xen updates would come through the security channel. Cheers, Thijs -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
