It seems to me that since there will always be patches and updates to packages between releases, and since we have the "proposed" updates, perhaps we could add an "updates" area, in addition to the non-free, contrib, and main sections. This would work VERY nicely for users who want to grab the latest patches. A good example of why this would be good is the XFree 3.3.2 being released in slink, and everyone wanting 3.3.3. Also, for potato, since it WILL be glibc 2.1 based, I suspect a large number of people would want versions of XFree, gnome, and other packages without having to upgrade their systems. By setting up an extension to our current directory structure for updates, we make it VERY simple for people to add these in. I THINK it might also make it easier to release maintenance releases in this manner. Simply have all the updated packages in the updates section. If apt and dselect do their jobs, it should grab the proper NEWer version of the package. Dave On Wed, 12 May 1999, Darren O. Benham wrote: > Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 13:10:53 -0700 > From: "Darren O. Benham" <gecko@debian.org> > To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian-gtk-gnome@lists.debian.org > Subject: Re: Release Plans (1999-05-10) > Resent-Date: 12 May 1999 20:13:09 -0000 > Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org > Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; > > On Wed, May 12, 1999 at 02:42:16PM -0500, Ossama Othman wrote: > > Hi Richard, > > > > I'm cross-posting to debian-gtk-gnome since we are trying to organize > > an effort to update GNOME for slink. > > > > > > It'd also be nice to get GNOME for slink out too. All that really > > > > needs to be done is to build all of the packages we built for potato > > > > for slink. The current GNOME slink packages are not all up-to-date > > > > with the potato packages. Many of us don't have slink installed or > > > > don't have a chrooted slink setup so any help with getting GNOME slink > > > > up-to-date would be greatly appreciated. > > > > > > Do you mean make GNOME 1.0 available for slink, separately? It's far > > > too large a change to be part of a stable revision. > > > > Hmm. I didn't think of it that way. I've just been "going with the > > flow" in terms of what I thought most people felt. However, what you > > say makes sense. What do you suggest we do? How should we go about > > making GNOME available for slink? Do we _not_ want to do that? > Opinion: probably not. That's what a release is.. that's what next > versions of releases are for... Security fixes are a special issue but > 'the next/latest/newest widgit' are not.. > > -- > Please cc all mailing list replies to me, also. > ========================================================================= > * http://benham.net/index.html <gecko@benham.net> <>< * > * -------------------- * -----------------------------------------------* > * Debian Developer, Debian Project Secretary, Debian Webmaster * > * <gecko@debian.org> <secretary@debian.org> <lintian-maint@debian.org> * > * <webmaster@debian.org> <gecko@fortunet.com> <webmaster@spi-inc.org> * > ========================================================================= >
Attachment:
pgpzwSFUQJN42.pgp
Description: PGP signature