Re: about volatile.d.o/n
* Florian Weimer (firstname.lastname@example.org) [041010 16:40]:
> * Andreas Barth:
> > - volatile is not "just another place" for backports, but should only
> > contain changes to stable programs that are necessary to keep them
> > functional;
> Can volatile receive critical updates which are usually not applied to
> stable because backports are not available for some reason?
Are you speaking about mozilla? ;)
Well, that's definitly not the first purpose of volatile, and so, I
would like to postpone it a bit.
However, in the long run, I think you're right about adding newer
packages if they fix security issues, and we can't fix them otherwise.
But I think it needs more than just some consideration how to do this in
a non-breaking way.
PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C