Hi On May 20, 2023 10:42:20 AM UTC, Luca Boccassi <bl...@debian.org> wrote: >On Sat, 20 May 2023 at 11:29, gustavo panizzo <g...@zumbi.com.ar> wrote: >> >> Hi >> >> On May 20, 2023 10:20:50 AM UTC, Luca Boccassi <bl...@debian.org> wrote: >> >On Fri, 19 May 2023, 15:39 gustavo panizzo, <g...@debian.org> wrote: >> > >> >> Package: release.debian.org >> >> Severity: normal >> >> User: release.debian....@packages.debian.org >> >> Usertags: unblock >> >> X-Debbugs-Cc: bl...@debian.org >> >> >> >> Please unblock package iptables-persistent >> >> >> >> (Please provide enough (but not too much) information to help >> >> the release team to judge the request efficiently. E.g. by >> >> filling in the sections below.) >> >> >> >> [ Reason ] >> >> The package is using alternatives to manage (systemd) aliases, >> >> this is not recommended by the systemd maintainers. >> >> >> >> See bug report #1036147 >> >> >> >> >> >> I've added alternatives to this package back in 2019 to solve #926927 >> >> as a point of coordination with other firewall managers in Debian >> >> (see https://lists.debian.org/debian-firewall/2019/08/msg00000.html) but >> >> the initiative never took off >> >> >> >> >> >> [ Impact ] >> >> This is (was) the only package in Debian which uses alternatives to >> >> manage aliases, which makes it different from what admins expect >> >> >> >> [ Tests ] >> >> This version of the package is clean in lintian and piuparts, >> >> I've upgraded my systems and found no problems >> >> >> >> >> >> [ Risks ] >> >> I see no risks, if an admin locally have changed the override files, >> >> we'll keep them as dpkg-bak >> >> >> >> >> >> [ Checklist ] >> >> [x] all changes are documented in the d/changelog >> >> [x] I reviewed all changes and I approve them >> >> [x] attach debdiff against the package in testing >> >> >> >> >> >> unblock iptables-persistent/1.0.20 >> >> >> > >> >Thanks for taking care of this - I just checked and cannot see the upload >> >to unstable though? >> >> I'd prefer to wait for an ack from the release team > >Ok, in that case I think it should be explicitly mentioned that this >is a 'preapproval' request.
How to do that? I hope is done now > >Kind regards, >Luca Boccassi
