ubuntu-bugcontrol team mailing list archive

[Brian Murray <brian@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 06:06:18PM -0500, Scott Howard wrote:
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> I did not renew my bug control membership (sorry!) and would like to
> have permissions restored. I am showard314 on lp [1] and
> showard@xxxxxxxxxx [2]. I had been bug control since ~2010, I can't tell
> when bug control lapsed.

I've added you back to the team, thanks for helping out.

> I use my "bug control powers" when coordinating patches between debian
> and ubuntu, and when managing the bugs for packages I maintain in Debian
> that are present on lp (e.g., an SRU I'm working on now [3]). I keep up
> to date with the definition of status, importances, triage steps/form
> responses, and always try to be helpful.
> 
> Thank you, and if anyone wants to take at the SRU [3], I'd appreciate
> it. It's a hard one to fix... the package in yakkety is 100% broken and
> cannot be fixed unless Qt4WebKit is re-introduced (no way!). A new
> version (in zesty-proposed) is needed to get the package to use Qt5 in
> yakkety. So the SRU is for a completely new version of the package so
> that the current 100% unusable package can at least run again. Big SRUs
> are bad, but this is a total regression - so is a big SRU acceptable in
> this case?

That's a very large, in terms of numbers, version bump.  While the SRU
team accepts point releases for SRUs, I'm not sure we'd let this in.
That being said if the application is totally broken it might be okay.
I'd suggest talking it out with some SRU team members in #ubuntu-release
or #ubuntu-devel.

--
Brian Murray

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature