Re: Accepted wine 0.9.21-1 (source i386)
Ove Kaaven wrote:
...
> Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 07:39:30 -0500
> Source: wine
...
> Version: 0.9.21-1
> Distribution: unstable
...
> Changes:
> wine (0.9.21-1) unstable; urgency=low
> .
> * New upstream release 0.9.21.
>
Well, thank you! But...
This version is already rather ancient according to upstream's release
schedule. It was released on September 13, 2006, closely followed by
version 0.9.22 on September 28, 2006 and version 0.9.23 on October 25,
2006. The current version 0.9.24 was released on October 29, 2006 and is
already more than two weeks olds as i'm writing this.
Why don't you simply package the latest release of wine instead of
always lagging various sub releases behind? Sure, prior testing before
submitting new packages to the ebian archive is a very good thing. But
why don't you simply do this with the most current release instead of
lagging four generations behind?
Given the ultimately quite fast pace of wine development, i'm pretty
sure upstream would rather prefer bug reports for the current release
instead of older versions. Bugs reported for older releases might
already be taken care of in the current release and would probably not
be very helpful in first place. Why not support upstream by releasing
their most current version to the public?
In any case, thanks for packaging wine for Debian! Other than what i'm
trying to complain about in a constructive way, i'm very happy with your
incredible contribution!
Cheers, P. *8^)
Reply to: