Re: Updating scanners and filters in Debian stable (3.1)

[Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net>]

Loïc Minier <lool+debian@via.ecp.fr> writes:

> Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net> - Fri, Oct 08, 2004:
> 
> > >                     My proposal is to create a policy for a
> > > repository with maintenance, security updates which introduces new
> > > packages and provides new functionality on outdated or useless
> > > packages from stable, and is built against stable.
> 
> > Suppose a nifty new emacs feature is developed; why should that new
> > functionality be excluded from this repository you are speaking of,
> > merely because it isn't a security update?
> 
>  Because the nifty new emacs feature doesn't render the emacs from
>  stable useless.  But I think your talking in loops.

But the original text sounded like "if I call part of this a security
update, then I can make arbitrary other changes."

In other words, only the changes necessary to keep the program useful
for its purpose should get in (whether security updates or not)--that
I can agree with.  But doing other "new functionality", which is not
actually necessary, this I cannot agree with.

And this means that the maintainer/whoever must do the potentially
hard work of backporting particular changes and not others from
upstream releases; merely including a new upstream release is not good
enough.

Thomas