Control: severity -1 serious On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 10:39:34PM +0100, Tobias Frost wrote: > I thought about it. I guess for now it is to say this is not serious. > One time a fellow DD told me to always ask this question if you pick a > RC severity: "Should this be a reason to delay a release?" If the > answer is no, the severity is not RC. I guess the answer here is no. > Also this is is not listed in https://release.debian.org/stretch/rc_pol > icy.txt, so -- as I was told in #830151 -- this is not RC.
Right, but from ever the email used in Maintainer must accept emails
from our automated tools, including dak and the BTS, and have always
been RC.
Now, if the RT deems this package as releasable even in that state, they
can add a stretch-ignore tag.
Anyway, the important part of getting the package get into testing
before the 5th Jan happened by temporary downgrading ths bug, now IMO
it does deserve to be RC again.
> The proper fix -- a MIA process -- will take some time. I've started
> one now.
And he even replied…
--
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo
GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`.
more about me: https://mapreri.org : :' :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `-
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
