On Wed, 05 Apr 2017 at 10:23:00 +0000, Niels Thykier wrote: > Simon McVittie: > > I would like to check whether the fix for #857660 (fd.o #92832) is > > something the release team would be comfortable with seeing in stretch, > > or whether it should be deferred to buster. I was recently able to get > > it tested and reviewed by SELinux users other than its author. > > I believe we have 1.11 now, so this should already be fixed via that, > correct?
No, we only have 1.11 in experimental. dbus uses a GNOME-like odd/even versioning scheme, so 1.odd branches are unsuitable for stable - at the moment they only go to testing/unstable rather briefly while I'm preparing to release a new 1.even branch, as a release candidate for the .0 release of that branch. The proposed fix for #857660 is a backport from the 1.11 branch. I'm intending to release 1.12.0 sometime after stretch is released, with buster probably shipping with 1.12.z or 1.14.z for some large number z. Please let me know whether you'd prefer me to release this change to 1.10.z for stretch, or exclude it from 1.10.z. Based on typical release frequency and freeze times, I expect to have dbus 1.10.16 or 1.10.18 (or possibly 1.10.20) in stretch. I'll continue to make subsequent 1.10.z releases intended for stretch-security or stretch-p-u. For the buster cycle (or at least the first part of it), I'm considering being more aggressive about uploading 1.odd.z releases to unstable so they get early testing, and switching to a 1.even.z branch (if necessarily releasing one specifically for Debian) at or before the transition freeze date. Would that be good to have? S