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

Re: so what? Re: Debian development modem

> This has made developers (many of whom were attracted by Debian's
> incremental and partial upgrade capability) very reluctant to
> upgrade.  It has also made it impossible to fix bugs in bo.


> Let us never make this mistake again.
> We have often good backwards compatibility, so that it doesn't matter
> if our stable distribution is a mixture of a.out and ELF or libc5 and
> libc6.

It would not be that easy for FSSTD/FHS mix I guess :)

That's why I would propose not have FHS-compliance goal for 2.1 release.
Instead, work on 2.1 as a "bugfix", simple package upgrade release, apt?, 
and in parallel for FHS transition.


Alex Y.

 _( )_
(     (o___           +-------------------------------------------+
 |      _ 7           |            Alexander Yukhimets            |
  \    (")            |       http://pages.nyu.edu/~aqy6633/      |
  /     \ \           +-------------------------------------------+

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: