Re: Updating scanners and filters in Debian stable (3.1)
Bernhard R. Link <blink@informatik.uni-freiburg.de> wrote:
> * Matthew Garrett <mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk> [040920 19:46]:
>> Serving our users is more important than slavish adherance to leaving
>> stable almost untouched.
>
> And trying to give our users a system that will not suddenly stop
> working is not serving them?
I can't see how providing functionality that may possibly become reduced
is worse than failing to provide that functionality in the first place.
Appropriate warnings would be necessary, of course.
>> Solution a: Newer versions of Mozilla are introduced. Functional
>> regressions are possible. However, admins have the choice of setting
>> Mozilla's status to hold. In the worst case, this solution can be made
>> equivilent to the current situation.
>
> What if the the second security update is a minor easily
> backportable fix? Will it also applied to packages untouched
> by the first security fix that introduced large functional changes?
> How can the admin install those easily?
The second fix should be applied to whatever is in the archive at the
time.
>> Solution c: We don't ship Mozilla. This is always equivilent to the
>> worst case of the current situation.
>
> This is a wrong assumption in my eyes. Having it in the archive gives
> some kind of garantees people rely on.
What solution would you propose? Failing to ship Mozilla and Openoffice
isn't really an option.
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59-chiark.mail.debian.devel@srcf.ucam.org
Reply to: