Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Damyan Ivanov wrote: >> Wouldn't the release team be pissed if the perl5.10 transition is done >> without them be aware if it?
*cough* I was well aware of the transition and have kept it in mind for most of the recent planning. It needs a bit of coordination with other transitions, as both the python and the OCaml 3.10.2 transition will also need some binNMUs, putting additional load on the buildds. I tried pinging Brendan in IRC a few times in the past two weeks to talk about the issue, but never was around at the right time to actually speak with him. I guess doing it by mail is more sane, anyway :) > IMO the NMU campaign is fully justified. An NMU campaign preparing the > python transition has been done, I see no reason to not do the same for > perl. Yes. > Can someone of the release team acknowledge this? The transition to > perl5.10 is in preparation since quite some time and the package has > been maturing in experimental. IMO the "release goal" status can be > granted to allow for easy NMU of the 109 package that remain to be > updated. Well, the release goal list is frozen by now and I wouldn't like to make exceptions. On the other hand, I believe that having Perl 5.10 in lenny is *critical* [1]. Uploading the new version unstable will automatically make all of the transition bugs rc anyway, so please go ahead, happy NMUing. Marc Footnotes: [1] Oh, how much I want all the niceties copied from Perl6... -- BOFH #359: YOU HAVE AN I/O ERROR -> Incompetent Operator error
pgp30bH46R3LB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
