Re: Updating scanners and filters in Debian stable (3.1)
On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 09:17:44AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>
> Suppose a nifty new emacs feature is developed; why should that new
> functionality be excluded from this repository you are speaking of,
> merely because it isn't a security update?
Because, even if they are not security updates (*) the new functionality adds
a value to an obsolete package which is better not to have anymore in the
repository, unlike the new emacs functionality, which does provide an
update to a perfectly working package.
> In other words, it sounds like the whole virus-scanner bit is a red
> herring, and what you actually want is just a repository that doesn't
> have the stability restrictions that Debian normally has. Maybe
> that's a good idea, but it needs to be argued for by something other
> than "oooh, virus scanners!"
I have been trying to put my point that way...
(*) The idea is a repository which does not have the restrictions that stable
has, with a policy that restricts the inclusion of random packages but allows
packages to be included based on some critera, and has security updates
applied to them (is a package X has a security bug, a new package would be
uploaded with a security fix).
[ Again, your MUA is broken, since you have sent me a copy of the mail sent to
a list which i am subscribed to, and i have told you not to alread FOUR times ]
--
Jesus Climent info:www.pumuki.org
Unix SysAdm|Linux User #66350|Debian Developer|2.4.27|Helsinki Finland
GPG: 1024D/86946D69 BB64 2339 1CAA 7064 E429 7E18 66FC 1D7F 8694 6D69
And then he ran into my knife... he ran into my knife ten times.
--June (Chicago)
Reply to: