Looking at SRU procedure I read this as example of bugs:
Bugs which do not fit under above categories, but (1) have an obviously safe
patch and (2) affect an application rather than critical infrastructure
packages (like X.org or the kernel).
I think the bug fits this description. Do you agree?
Anyway thank you very much for Gutsy build.
2008/3/11, Tormod Volden <email address hidden>:
>
> Yes, I agree. If it was only up to me... In Ubuntu we have "backports"
> but that's for new features and not for bugfixes. Then we have the SRU
> (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates) which follow a strict
> procedure.
>
> BTW, I have uploaded Gutsy builds to my PPA now.
>
>
> --
> XaoS display problem in Virtualbox (Hardy Alpha 6)
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/200650
> You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber
> of the bug.
>
Thank you for explaining.
Looking at SRU procedure I read this as example of bugs:
Bugs which do not fit under above categories, but (1) have an obviously safe
patch and (2) affect an application rather than critical infrastructure
packages (like X.org or the kernel).
I think the bug fits this description. Do you agree?
Anyway thank you very much for Gutsy build.
2008/3/11, Tormod Volden <email address hidden>: /wiki.ubuntu. com/StableRelea seUpdates) which follow a strict /bugs.launchpad .net/bugs/ 200650
>
> Yes, I agree. If it was only up to me... In Ubuntu we have "backports"
> but that's for new features and not for bugfixes. Then we have the SRU
> (https:/
> procedure.
>
> BTW, I have uploaded Gutsy builds to my PPA now.
>
>
> --
> XaoS display problem in Virtualbox (Hardy Alpha 6)
> https:/
> You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber
> of the bug.
>