severity 790925 important severity 814795 important thanks On Wed, 04 May 2016, Santiago Vila wrote: > The package was removed from testing, so there is no "past" (unless we > want to consider stable as the "past").
> In other words: Would the maintainer consider making #790925 and > #814795 just "important" for pandas to propagate to testing on the > architectures it currently builds? interesting take on things - I have never allowed myself such "free willing" ;) FTBFS bugs usually are indeed 'serious' (thus RC-critical) by default. In the case of pandas I can indeed make a case (upstream doesn't care about non x86 archs atm) that it must not be unusable for the rest of the ecosystem thus lowering it to important. So let's do it and see how it goes - I don't think it would be sufficient alone for migration to testing which does have memories of previous builds in there. Thanks -- Yaroslav O. Halchenko Center for Open Neuroscience http://centerforopenneuroscience.org Dartmouth College, 419 Moore Hall, Hinman Box 6207, Hanover, NH 03755 Phone: +1 (603) 646-9834 Fax: +1 (603) 646-1419 WWW: http://www.linkedin.com/in/yarik
