Why back-porting patches to stable instead of releasing a new package.
- To: Debian Developers <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Cc: Matt Zimmerman <email@example.com>
- Subject: Why back-porting patches to stable instead of releasing a new package.
- From: Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 03:15:55 -0500
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20030723081555.GA32048@debian.org>
- Mail-followup-to: Debian Developers <email@example.com>, Matt Zimmerman <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- In-reply-to: <20030722223606.GB15133@alcor.net>
- References: <20030715092532.GA8393@achos.com> <20030715125624.GL11400@alcor.net> <20030717151620.GA23268@debian.org> <20030721174232.GL13924@alcor.net> <20030722122252.GC24699@debian.org> <20030722223606.GB15133@alcor.net>
On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 06:36:06PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > I've some questions for you, first.
> > Would you mind, please, to explain to me why back-porting a patch for a
> > buggy package in stable would be better than releasing a new package for the
> > stable distribution?
> Do you mind taking this discussion to a public mailing list so that I don't
> have to explain over and over?
The kind of patch we were talking about was for a security fix. I was asking
this question to Matt because the new package i'd like to release for stable
also fixes many other bugs.
I'm sorry if some of you might think this question to be dumb or stupid, but
it's not obvious to me.
Please, please, please: no reference/flame about releasing new stable
distribution more often. That would not be the point.
P.S.: Matt, if you felt this question to be common, it might be worthy to add
some/your explanations to the developers-reference too.
Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis | Elegant or ugly code as well
aliases: Luca ^De [A-Z][A-Za-z\-]*[iy]'\?s$ | as fine or rude sentences have
Luca, a wannabe ``Good guy''. | something in common: they
local LANG="it_IT@euro" | don't depend on the language.