[Pkg-privacy-maintainers] Bug#861744: Bug#861744: Bug#861744: torbrowser-launcher: Should not be part of Stretch

Holger Levsen holger at layer-acht.org
Mon May 22 11:43:55 UTC 2017

On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 12:12:39PM +0200, intrigeri wrote:
> While I see a few interesting related points and questions in your
> message, I still don't understand what is your position wrt.
> what's most relevant here IMO, so I figured I would ask you instead of
> arguing based on wrong assumptions:
:) thanks for asking!

> Fundamentally, do you disagree with the main point this bug report is
> about i.e. "Should not be part of Stretch"?

yes, somewhat, but I acknowledge that it's not my call.

> And if you indeed do want to see this package in Stretch, how do you
> plan to be involved on maintaining it via stable-security or
> stable-updates?

I don't plan to be involved.

My trigger to send this mail are those mails generated through the failures
on https://jenkins.debian.net/view/torbrowser/ - I get a daily mail that
torbrowser-launcher in jessie is broken, and weekly mails about the breakage
in wheezy-backports and jessie-backports.

So of course what I shall do is to disable those mails to me, after all
I'm one of the maintainers of jenkins.d.n :) But then I fear that
torbrowser-launcher will bitrot even more…

So, in summary, yes, I disagree with this bugreport that I think that the
package is supportable in stable and then I realized that I also question
the plan to support it in stretch-backports, cause I'm very aware of the
status of the package in stable-backports and oldstable-backports today.

I realize that my position is not the most helpful one, but I thought and
think that it's also not helpful to be aware of problems and stay silent on

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 811 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-privacy-maintainers/attachments/20170522/f3386de4/attachment.sig>

More information about the Pkg-privacy-maintainers mailing list