Hi Lionel, > We should sort that out before release; if RMs disagree (e.g. punt it > to a point release), feel free to tag etch-ignore and/or downgrade > severity so as not to block release just for that. > > If other pkg-mailman members disagree, feel free to discuss.
Well, I do not agree that this is release critical in the sense that if
it isn't fixed, mailman should be removed. That would break upgrades
immediately instead of possibly in the future.
That said, it is still a very important problem to solve. I see the
following possible solutions:
1.) Include bin/export in mailman now, and perhaps update it in a
point release if necessary. I think adding the extra binary
does not incurr much breakage chance, but would make an upgrade
path still possible.
2.) Provide the 2.2.x branch as mailman2.2 in Lenny, and keep the
mailman package at 2.1.x. This would mean a lot more security
support, but it would work for the upgrade path.
I think at this point we need to know whether the RM's will allow a new
upload with the current bin/export added.
thanks.
Thijs
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
