Comment 93 for bug 1990450

Hey Andreas, thanks for the review

> The changes file for bionic-unapproved includes versions 18.04.11.16 up to 18.04.11.22, while the changes file for what was accepted into bionic-proposed is from 18.04.11.14 to 18.04.11.21.
>
> You can see the range of versions does not match each other, not even in a continuation scheme. Should bionic-unapproved be rejected?

the set selected here was to reflect the actual change of the SRU (the previous revision was a testfix which doesn't need to be verified again so was slightly confusing) but .15 should probably have been included, though in practice it cover the same content and bug reference than the entries included.

I personally wouldn't reject the upload over that but you are the SRU reviewer so up to you at the end, let us know what you want to see happening for the upload to be unblocked

> xenial-proposed has a changes file for just version 16.04.18, and xenial-unapproved's changes file is from 16.04.18 to 16.04.19.
>
> in that form, xenial-unapproved would be ok to consider for sru review and acceptance on top of what is in xenial-proposed currently.

I'm unsure to understand what you describe there, from the queue
https://launchpadlibrarian.net/702021083/update-manager_16.04.19_source.changes

so the change includes the entries from .18 and .19 which are the versions not yet in -updates. My understanding is that it matches the common practice of including the changelog entry from the previous upload when doing a follow-up fix for a version that didn't get verified yet? If so I would say the xenial upload is as intended and should be accepted