Re: Updating scanners and filters in Debian stable (3.1)
On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 04:16:37PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Daniel Burrows <firstname.lastname@example.org> [2004.10.02.1612 +0200]:
> > What should be done if a newer version of a stable package has new
> > dependencies? Could the dependencies be added to volatile?
> I guess they would have to be, yes.
Not always. In the past many backports have been built including perfectly
avoidable new dependencies. The volatile archive should have policy and
deb tools frozen. So no new debconf, no new ucf and so on. In many
cases packaging scripts should remain the same of stable ones.
The purpose is clear: volatile should contain only unavoidable major
updates for a few known monster-programs (e.g. mozilla family)
or program classes (anti-virus, anti-spam, security tools),
not random backports.
I personally agree on a stable-like policy for volatile uploads and
one or more volatile-RMs, too. I think that no more than 50 programs
would enter volatile in that way, finally. A reasonable efforts I think.
Francesco P. Lovergine