Hi Michael! Thanks for the quick answer.
Michael Biebl: > Am 13.01.19 um 10:46 schrieb intrigeri: >> What's your plan wrt. stretch-backports? > I do think we nailed the worst regressions by now, so my plan was to > wait until 240-4 has migrated to testing and then upload that to > stretch-backports, for the simple reason that this means less effort for > me. This is reassuring. > If someone want's to backport the fixes to 239-12~bpo9+1, that would > obviously ok with me as well. *If* we decide to fall back to this option for Tails, I'll happily share the Git branch (and even upload to stretch-backports after someone reviews it). But I do hope we won't have to go that way. >> FWIW, on the Tails side I'll build a custom backport of 240-4 and will >> run it through the Tails integration test suite, because we have other >> incentives to upgrade (getting the fixes for >> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/9461) and I'd rather do this >> upgrade now in a controlled, relaxed way, than at the last minute >> before our freeze (if v240 is uploaded to stretch-backports on >> Jan 17-18). > Please let us know about the results of those tests. > If 240-4 fails horribly, we could revisit the decision to upload this > version to stretch-backports. Will do! Cheers, -- intrigeri
