Re: Maintaining intermediary versions in *-backports
On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 01:30:00PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>...
> I think we should have an additional exception for cases where it
> becomes impractical to backport newer versions but a maintainer is
> willing to support it with important fixes.
>...
Is this a good idea, or wouldn't it be better to strongly try to avoid
backporting such packages at all?
If at the time of the buster release all packages in stretch-backports
would be the same versions as in buster, then the question of the
duration of backports support you raise in your other email would
become reduced to cover the duration until buster is released:
Security support for stretch-backports would at that point basically
consist of following DSAs, and whenever a DSA is for a backported
package it gets rebuilt as ~bpo for backports.[1]
That's already close to something that could be completely automated.
> Ben.
cu
Adrian
[1] the same could be done for updates from buster point releases
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
Reply to: