[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Why are backports of Squeeze packages in etch-backports?

On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 03:06:54PM +0100, Alexander Wirt wrote:
> Axel Beckert schrieb am Monday, den 02. March 2009:
> > Hi,
> > 
> *snip* 
> > Having backports of Squeeze packages in etch-backports doesn't really
> > make a dist-upgrade from Etch to Lenny easier.
> See:
> http://lists.backports.org/lurker-bpo/message/20090220.215045.8a623425.en.html

It's probably a bit late now if this policy has been inacted, but I'd
like to vote *against* it.

Not allowing such backports would indeed make direct upgrades to lenny
much easier, and it seems a great shame to risk breaking upgrades in
this way.

I'd say that it was reasonable for people who want things backported
from squeeze to need to upgrade to the current stable release first.

Dominic Hargreaves | http://www.larted.org.uk/~dom/
PGP key 5178E2A5 from the.earth.li (keyserver,web,email)

Reply to: