Re: Backports vs Pinning Lenny
> > What of "talk with me" didn't you
> > understand?
I think users want a diferent repository for backports so they can use
all upgradable software as it becomes available and the use of pinning
is not applyied. The same behaviour using lenny's repositories would
upgrade to lenny.
Using the porposed scheme for package versions should let users to
upgrade from sarge-bpo to etch-bpo to lenny-bpo easily wich is very
good.
i know several software work from lenny to etch and even sarge, but it's
not easy to use. So, is this case what i propose is that bpo should use
the lenny version ( the people who submit, just submits the same version
that is in lenny). In the future, with bpo integrated in debian's
archives, we can have the same file for lenny and bpo.
just a thought.
Reply to: