Re: Package splitting and upgrades
On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 11:08:02AM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 11:15:45AM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > When a package `foo' in potato is split in two for woody, `foo' and `bar',
> > it is considered acceptable that people upgrading from potato to woody
> > lose the functionality provided by `bar' and have to read the release
> > notes to know why? What if there are a lot of splits like this and the
> > release notes becomes several kilometers long? Is this the type of
> > quality we want for our users?
>
> Nobody ever said major version upgrades would be smooth.
"Nobody ever said software would be good."
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
Reply to: