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

stability of non-free?

A lot of users seem to think packages in non-free are more stable
than packages in unstable.

As far as I know, the only way we make the packages in buzz stable
is by freezing them, and only adding bugfixes to buzz. This freezing
out perioud is never applied to non-free, and therefor I (as maintainer)
view non-free as equally stable as unstable.

Thus, when I recently upgraded gs-4.01, I made it depend on
libpaper, a package (then) only present in unstable.

How are the views from the other people in the debian team?
Should packages in non-free be somehow more stable than
the ones in unstable? And if so, how are the maintainers
of non-free packages to ensure this?

Or, is it OK to make non-free packages depend on unstable, and
maybe we should add a README to non-free, explaining
that the packages in there are viewed as unstable as "unstable",
and that the packages in non-free may depend on "unstable"?

Thanks for any comments,

joost witteveen
Use Debian/GNU Linux!

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com

Reply to: