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

Re: Proposed change to debian release system

Eric Dorland <eric@debian.org> writes:

>> 	* spamassassin
>> 	* snort
>> could be considered perishable because their effectiveness is reduced over
>> time. Such classed packages should be allowed to be updated in stable, I
>> feel. Of course, it could be argued that any package is perishable, and thus
>> this whole thing becomes a moot point...
> We always have to be careful with things like that, since stable is
> *stable*... it should not really change, except to address critical
> issues. Not that I disagree with your proposal. I think that some
> value in updating these packages, and for packages such as
> spamassassin and snort the case could be made that updating them would
> be security updates, particularly in the case of snort.
> Also those two packages really contain rule sets that could be
> packaged separately and updated, while leaving the core code
> unchanged. That would probably be the least surprising thing, and the
> least likely to cause bugs, but would still be a lot of work and 
> testing.
Perhaps the rule-sets could be handled outside of the debian package
system, like clamav does (clamav runs a daemon that fetches new
rulesets as they become availle on the Net).

Andreas Rottmann         | Rotty@ICQ      | 118634484@ICQ | a.rottmann@gmx.at
http://yi.org/rotty      | GnuPG Key: http://yi.org/rotty/gpg.asc
Fingerprint              | DFB4 4EB4 78A4 5EEE 6219  F228 F92F CFC5 01FD 5B62

Packages should build-depend on what they should build-depend.

Reply to: