Re: mws vs metar data, nsw 1, metar 0

Path	csiph.com!news.mixmin.net!news.unit0.net!news.panservice.it!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From	Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org>
Newsgroups	linux.debian.user
Subject	Re: mws vs metar data, nsw 1, metar 0
Date	Wed, 19 Oct 2016 17:20:02 +0200
Message-ID	<su0OS-308-39@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<stPTs-3zU-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <stXQZ-17w-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <stYk1-1iy-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <stZJ7-2hO-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <stZSN-2nd-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
X-Mailbox-Line	From debian-user-request@lists.debian.org Wed Oct 19 15:11:53 2016
Old-Return-Path	<hmh@debian.org>
X-Amavis-Spam-Status	No, score=-7.7 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, MURPHY_DRUGS_REL8=0.02, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Dkim-Signature	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=smtpout; bh=UW1OkuyPWuBr5Ua CPjFlShdODqY=; b=MJjXOnRSWwQXgmEliYUe28ADZBWaaGwJyQ4VznaUuDaxlnk N16HtdzIPA3LDMPN8S+pA8Z0I5rS3gPs4JgKO/z/y4MDbDJesqrRodm62P+CrqE4 sRNHvK/5IK3ZCGbz0Tfm0roz8mz7Flhk2WPwliPlCmHbpH5FGtJ72+/CVSzQ=
X-Sasl-Enc	wrkCQ9/msaDsDZnxcizZyBKcrkvC7PRX05o9jZazYpOg 1476889888
MIME-Version	1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding	7bit
Content-Type	text/plain
X-Mailer	MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-8de8db3f
X-Mailing-List	<debian-user@lists.debian.org> archive/latest/713146
List-ID	<debian-user.lists.debian.org>
List-URL	<https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/>
List-Archive	https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/1476889888.936116.760932617.30A2F857@webmail.messagingengine.com
Approved	robomod@news.nic.it
Lines	24
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway
Sender	robomod@news.nic.it
X-Original-Date	Wed, 19 Oct 2016 13:11:28 -0200
X-Original-Message-ID	<1476889888.936116.760932617.30A2F857@webmail.messagingengine.com>
X-Original-References	<201610182332.14063.gheskett@shentel.net> <201610190801.59375.gheskett@shentel.net> <20161019123829.e6sht7fp56i22ipr@darac.org.uk> <201610190959.55603.gheskett@shentel.net> <20161019141314.2zzw5gkg6p2ri7uw@darac.org.uk>
Xref	csiph.com linux.debian.user:173599

Show key headers only | View raw

On Wed, Oct 19, 2016, at 12:13, Darac Marjal wrote:
> Well, in theory, once bug 863347 is fixed, yes, it'll get released at 
> some point. The bug is marked as "grave" AND has a patch, so it 
> shouldn't be too hard to get it into the next release of Debian 
> (stretch). With regards to Jessie, well it's not a security-related 
> change so it probably wouldn't be released, but it may well be 
> back-ported, but I don't know what the policy is there (does someone 
> need to request the backport, for example?)

The policy is that we want to, and do fix grave bugs in stable (and even
in oldstable) when possible, yes.

That said, for it to happen at all, the maintainer needs to prepare and
thoroughly test the update, and file a bug requesting approval from the
stable release managers.  The procedure is in the developer's manual,
and "reportbug release.debian.org" knows about it, too.

AFAIK (and IME) *regression risk* and *impact* are the main reasons why
an update would be (or wouldn't be) considered suitable for stable or
oldstable.   I have no idea where people got the notion that we would
restrict stable updates to security fixes only, but it is incorrect.

-- 
  Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org>

Thread

mws vs metar data, nsw 1, metar 0 Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-10-19 05:40 +0200
  Re: mws vs metar data, nsw 1, metar 0 Peter Ludikovsky <peter@ludikovsky.name> - 2016-10-19 06:40 +0200
    Re: mws vs metar data, nsw 1, metar 0 Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-10-19 11:10 +0200
      Re: mws vs metar data, nsw 1, metar 0 Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2016-10-19 11:20 +0200
        Re: mws vs metar data, nsw 1, metar 0 Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-10-19 14:10 +0200
          Re: mws vs metar data, nsw 1, metar 0 Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2016-10-19 14:40 +0200
            Re: mws vs metar data, nsw 1, metar 0 Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2016-10-19 16:10 +0200
              Re: mws vs metar data, nsw 1, metar 0 Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2016-10-19 16:20 +0200
                Re: mws vs metar data, nsw 1, metar 0 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org> - 2016-10-19 17:20 +0200
                Re: mws vs metar data, nsw 1, metar 0 Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2016-10-19 17:30 +0200

csiph-web