[Pkg-clamav-devel] Should we try to get 0.94.dfsg.2-1 into lenny?
debian at kitterman.com
Sun Dec 7 22:15:16 UTC 2008
On Sunday 07 December 2008 16:54, Stephen Gran wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, Michael Tautschnig said:
> > > > Hmm, could it be that it will work out through
> > > > stable-proposed-updates? I'm not sure whether the SRMs will accept
> > > > such large updates, though. Does one of the more experienced DDs
> > > > have an idea about this?
> > >
> > > We have yet to do it, sadly. There was a proposal for rolling up
> > > volatile updates into things like etch and a half, but I don't think
> > > that happened, and I'm not sure what the consensus was on that
> > > experiment in the end.
> > >
> > > I think it would be worthwhile having that discussion on
> > > debian-release, where people with more experience with the release
> > > process could contribute.
> > Should we initiate that discussion post-lenny, or would you recommend
> > doing so right away?
> I don't think the discussion is time sensitive. We tried new things
> with etch after the release, so we can probably try new things with
> lenny after it releases.
> That being said, at least chatting with the SRMs ahead of time to see
> what they think of the idea seems like a good plan. That doesn't need
> to wait for things to settle down.
From a RM perspective, I think the way to consider it is that there is a point
beyond which clamav is to old to be useful. The package is sufficiently
useless that it should be treated like an RC bug.
The trick is how to test it and coordinate integration with/update of the
More information about the Pkg-clamav-devel