Re: Help requested: Packages which FTBFS randomly
- Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2017 14:49:08 +0100
- From: Santiago Vila <sanvila@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Help requested: Packages which FTBFS randomly
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 06:59:00PM +0000, Niels Thykier wrote:
> Santiago Vila:
> > On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 06:23:00AM +0000, Niels Thykier wrote:
> >> Santiago already brought it up in #844264. I believe my answer in
> >> comment 70 is still relevant (other than I incorrectly used "after the
> >> freeze" when I meant "after the release").
> > Well, but when I said "Ok, will do" in Bug #844264, it was a reply to
> > your request to postpone this after the freeze, not after the release.
> I obviously wrote the wrong thing
Actually, it was not obvious for me at all, this is what you wrote:
> But I do not think we have capacity for that talk right now in the
> release team (between an incomplete openssl transition and the BTS
> breaking causing britney to migrate tons of packages despite RC
You mentioned here two things: openssl transition and the BTS glitch
that made buggy packages to propagate to testing. Those were the
"issues of the day" at the time, and are now mostly in the past.
This, and the fact that no other Release Manager fixed your mistake,
is the reason why I believed you meant "freeze" when you wrote "freeze".
> and I am sorry for creating that misunderstanding.
Ok, but please let us face the consequences: I downgraded all those
bugs to important because I expected you, Release Managers, to give
some guidelines about how to handle them *before* the release.
If this is not going to happen, I'll have to raise those bugs to
serious again, following your own guideline (see Message #35 from
Julien Cristau) that the bugs are serious as a general rule (because
no other guideline was given so far).
If we really want to skip this issue for stretch, then we should use
stretch-ignore, not severity important.
Do I have your permission to use stretch-ignore here?
[ I would do that on any FTBFS-randomly bug present or future, except
those packages failing more than 50% of the time, because IMO that
would be completely absurd ].