Hi Simon, [ cc += debian-boot@ for information ]
Simon McVittie <s...@debian.org> (2025-05-12): > As a general rule, would you prefer maintainers of udeb-producing > packages to wait for your pre-approval before uploading anything > non-urgent to unstable during this period; or is it OK to upload to > unstable, and rely on the block-udeb hints to prevent our packages > from reaching testing at an inconvenient time? I've just done some picking and choosing between packages that show up on <https://d-i.debian.org/testing-summary.html>; some of them looked like things I needed or that made sense to have in trixie, some of them looked like “unimportant” updates that could wait, and I've ignored them. I haven't been consistent, but you can check debian-boot@ and/or debian-release@ from the last few hours for some public queries sent to maintainers/uploaders, as I tried to find the right balance: https://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2025/05/msg00153.html https://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2025/05/msg00155.html https://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2025/05/msg00175.html (The linux kernel hinting was already managed earlier, the installer and kernel teams have had a little routine for a number of release cycles.) If you have packages with important changes (like that was the case for openssh, xorg-server), it's probably best to wait before uploading less important (but possibly worrying/distracting to me) things to unstable, so that the existing packages might be picked up/pushed (either because I'm doing that on my own — usually for debian-boot@ packages or things that got patched because we asked — or because I'm told I really should). Freezes usually don't last long, so I don't recall receiving many requests to look at this or that package for an unblock-udeb (or an age-days/urgent). Maybe also because the initial choice of packages (see first paragraph) isn't too crazy to begin with (hopefully). If testing and unstable are in sync already, and if you don't care when it migrates, uploading to unstable without any pre-approval *should* be fine. I'm sure we might be able to construct, or might even encounter, counterexamples, but I lack imagination right now. > (subject to the usual release team approval, "targeted changes only", > etc. that apply to all frozen packages whether they have udebs or > not) (sure) Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org) <https://debamax.com/> D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
