<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes" ?>
<!DOCTYPE bugzilla SYSTEM "http://bugs.gentoo.org/bugzilla.dtd">

<bugzilla version="2.22.7"
          urlbase="http://bugs.gentoo.org/"
          maintainer="bugzilla@gentoo.org"
>

    <bug>
          <bug_id>67910</bug_id>
          
          <creation_ts>2004-10-17 11:26 0000</creation_ts>
          <short_desc>mail-filter/razor-2.61: please mark as stable</short_desc>
          <delta_ts>2004-10-27 07:03:33 0000</delta_ts>
          <reporter_accessible>1</reporter_accessible>
          <cclist_accessible>1</cclist_accessible>
          <classification_id>1</classification_id>
          <classification>Unclassified</classification>
          <product>Gentoo Linux</product>
          <component>Ebuilds</component>
          <version>2004.2</version>
          <rep_platform>All</rep_platform>
          <op_sys>All</op_sys>
          <bug_status>RESOLVED</bug_status>
          <resolution>FIXED</resolution>
          
          
          
          <priority>P2</priority>
          <bug_severity>normal</bug_severity>
          <target_milestone>---</target_milestone>
          
          
          
          <everconfirmed>1</everconfirmed>
          <reporter>gentoo-bugger@msquadrat.de</reporter>
          <assigned_to>net-mail@gentoo.org</assigned_to>
          

      

      
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>gentoo-bugger@msquadrat.de</who>
            <bug_when>2004-10-17 11:26:46 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>Razor 2.61 is out and in the tree since July with no bug reports since then. 

There are some glitches in the previous versions; I can&apos;t remember the details, it was nothing really bad but some stuff which could get on SpamAssassin&apos;s nerves (that&apos;s why the spamassassin-3.0.0 ebuild recommends later versions).

If there aren&apos;t any grave bugs known to somebody, could this ebuild please be marked as stable on all platforms on which 2.36 is stable (and probably amd64 as 2.40 is marked as stable for that one)?</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>ticho@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2004-10-17 12:00:53 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>I think we can do this. Objections, anyone?

This is what sometimes happens to packages without an explicit maintainer - they get forgotten. Sorry about that.

If there are no objections within next few hours, I&apos;m marking 2.61 and 2.40-r1 stable.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>ticho@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2004-10-19 08:33:41 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>Marked stable on x86, requesting stable keywording from other archs.

Thanks for your time, guys.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>kloeri@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2004-10-19 14:00:16 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>Stable on alpha.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>hansmi@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2004-10-19 14:10:05 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>Done on ppc.
</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>weeve@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2004-10-19 18:54:17 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>Stable on sparc.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>slarti@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2004-10-27 02:09:53 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>Stable on amd64. I&apos;ll leave it to Andrej to resolve.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>ticho@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2004-10-27 07:03:33 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>Closing, thanks everyone.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
      
    </bug>

</bugzilla>