On Friday 29 June 2007 18:47, Otavio Salvador wrote: > Frans Pop <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: > > On Friday 29 June 2007 16:58, Otavio Salvador wrote: > >> Well, we can do not guarantee it but if it's simple (and on this > >> case it's) we could provide it. > > > > For all eternity? Don't see the point really. > > Sure not. At least for lenny release and then we can drop them again. Please explain why the compatibility issue would be any less after lenny then for etch->lenny? In this case it would maybe be possible, but keeping compatibility here would mean that we would be morally obliged to keep compatibility for _any_ changes affecting preseeding and I'd be willing to bet that in other cases that really would mean we would have to include really strange/complex hacks or that it would just be impossible . Should we then just postpone the change until after the lenny release? I do not think it is worth it to limit ourselves like that. I really do not think it is worth keeping compatibility on one minor area when we can expect major changes in preseeding in general anyway between now and the lenny release. You should not look at this in isolation, but as part of all changes likely to happen between now and lenny. Cheers, FJP  One area where I expect such changes is in apt-install, and probably also in partman.
Description: PGP signature