Re: about volatile.d.o/n
* Duncan Findlay (duncf@debian.org) [041008 20:10]:
> On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 06:31:56PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > Agreed. So, this means: Backport the necessary changes. Sometimes, it's
> > just not enough to only update the virus scanner definitions, because
> > new functionality is needed to scan the files (just consider that a very
> > new archive format gets so popular that it needs to be supported, just
> > like zip now).
> When spamassassin is upgraded, it's more than just the rules. Often
> the method of parsing the message is changed -- leading to better
> results, or support for different tests is added, etc. It would be
> very difficult to only backport the appropriate changes, and the
> result would be less stable than the version from which backporting
> was taking place. On the other hand, each new version makes minor
> changes to functionality.
Well, I think, it's in the end a case-by-case decision whether it's
better to take more or less a current package, und perhaps weed out some
definitly unrelated changes, or to take the old package and backport
some changes. Of course, in the end, the goal needs to be to make the
package as useable as possible - and of course, above all, do no harm,
and don't break things.
Cheers,
Andi
--
http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C
Reply to: