Re: enabling wheezy-backports by default (Re: Backports integrated into the main archive
Hi,
On Wed, 3 Apr 2013 10:21:16 +0200 (CEST)
Thorsten Glaser <t.glaser@tarent.de> wrote:
> > I think dselect is effectively unmaintained. It had an open RFH for
> > years, although that's been closed now so maybe I'm wrong and someone
> > picked it up?
>
> Possibly, but it’s still useful, *especially* for manual
> interactive cleanup of unused packages that a-g autoremove
> doesn’t touch.
>
> That being said, a deficiency in dselect probably doesn’t
> warrant tipping the scale against enabling wheezy-backports
> by default (if the problem exists post-lenny at all, anyway,
> see above), it’s just another data point to consider, and,
> possibly document (if the problem indeed still exists).
What I want to do with enabling wheezy-backports by default in installation
is, it can solve some problems with stable release.
In my point of view, most of dselect lovers would use their Wheezy system
by upgrading from Squeeze, (or use Jessie or Sid). So, if we turn -backports
on, it wouldn't affect them. Also, if it would be note in Release Note,
that's fine and they will disable -backports by hand.
My proposal don't satisfy all users (I know), but it'll bring huge benefit(*)
to users by default, IMHO. And users can disable it manually if they don't
want to do so.
*) since we're in web browser ages and users can get lastest browsers
from -backports as they want.
Even if it's late for 7.0, it is still worth to consider to introduce it in
point release, IMO.
--
Regards,
Hideki Yamane henrich @ debian.or.jp/org
http://wiki.debian.org/HidekiYamane
Reply to: