Just a heads up on a bit here...
## torbrowser-launcher (Focal) I helped the contributor with this one previously, and am pleased to see it's been sponsored. Unfortunately it's missing the LP bug reference, but also the contributor has since mentioned in the bug that an additional fix appears to be needed. It seems that the SRU needs to be delayed then, and I asked in the bug to confirm. I didn't reject this from the queue because the contributor is new to Ubuntu process so I didn't want to confuse them further in case it turns out that a reject is not needed. Outcome: SRU processing is blocked. Feedback: I could have spotted the missing bug reference myself previously, but didn't look throroughly as I assumed the sponsor would do that. When sponsoring, please check that the documented SRU process steps have been followed before uploading.
Original SRU 'justification' written in the bug[1] states the regression risk is "There should be none." As you stated elsewhere, "none" is not a valid risk justification.
Further, they're waiting for this to be done in Debian as well (see [2]) so it does indeed need a wait on this going forward because it needs to be fixed in another spot - that blocks SRU processing, but if we're going to be nitpicky as we should be, you should probably "block" also on the lack of a justification - as "there should be none" is not really a valid potential analysis.
Thomas
[1]: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/torbrowser-launcher/+bug/1896085
[2]: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/torbrowser-launcher/+bug/1896085/comments/3
