Re: Debian 3.0r1
On Fri, Jul 26, 2002 at 09:35:48AM +1000, Brian May wrote:
> Then it is OK to have packages in woody that both the maintainer and
> upstream authors recommend you should not use. eg. because the version
> in woody is old, obsolete, and contain numerous potential security
We've done this for years. The suggested solution has normally been to
release more often - a lot of the pressure to update things in stable
would go away if people were more confident that a new release would
occur in a reasonable time period.
The only other thing I recall being taken particularly seriously is to
spin a new release based on the existing release plus updates to
particular packages (I belive someone put together something for
potato). That makes it plain that the update is more substantial than
we would tolerate for stable and allows people to assess the risks
> Even though this software is still experimental and the change won't
> affect any *real* users?
Why did the software make it into stable in the first place, then?
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org