Re: Clarification of NMU policy

2005-11-04 Thread Steve Langasek
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 02:40:07PM +0100, Loïc Minier wrote: > On Wed, Nov 02, 2005, Steve Langasek wrote: > > For the record: there currently is not a 0-day NMU policy in effect. There > > was a 0-day NMU policy through the sarge release, and there are 0-day NMU > > policies during BSPs, but the

Re: Clarification of NMU policy

2005-11-02 Thread Loïc Minier
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005, Steve Langasek wrote: > For the record: there currently is not a 0-day NMU policy in effect. There > was a 0-day NMU policy through the sarge release, and there are 0-day NMU > policies during BSPs, but the default NMU policy has reverted to that in the > developer's referenc

Re: Clarification of NMU policy

2005-11-02 Thread Aurelien Jarno
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 05:12:18AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 07:21:48PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > I have been in a discussion with a fellow developer about the exact > > meaning of the "0-day NMU policy" that is currently in effect. > > For the record: ther

Re: Clarification of NMU policy

2005-11-02 Thread Steve Langasek
On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 07:21:48PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > I have been in a discussion with a fellow developer about the exact > meaning of the "0-day NMU policy" that is currently in effect. For the record: there currently is not a 0-day NMU policy in effect. There was a 0-day NMU po

Re: Clarification of NMU policy

2005-10-31 Thread Frank Lichtenheld
On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 07:21:48PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > I have been in a discussion with a fellow developer about the exact > meaning of the "0-day NMU policy" that is currently in effect. > Questions: Ok, I've tried to answer the questions as good as possible. I think this aren't t