Re: Maintaining intermediary versions in *-backports
On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 02:53:57PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-05-24 at 16:08 +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > 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?
> [...]
>
> That assumes knowledge of future incompatibilities.
>
> As an example, initramfs-tools in wheezy-backports is version
> 0.115~bpo70+1 and I never updated it to 0.120 because that's
> incompatible with the wheezy versions of cryptsetup, lvm2 and systemd-
> sysv. I think I could update it to 0.116 safely but that doesn't seem
> to be allowed.
That's the reason why I said "strongly try".
My point was that there would be benefits from going in the opposite
direction.
> Ben.
cu
Adrian
--
"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: