Re: about volatile.d.o/n
Henning Makholm writes:
> 1. Volatile is a means for *pushing* updates to stable
> installations, where such updates are necessary for *preserving*
> the utility of packages due to changes of the outside world.
> 2. "Necessary for preserving the utility" should be judged under
> the assumption that the machine that runs stable does not itself
> change. (I.e., appeals to "this is needed for modern hardware"
> don't count).
> 3. No update pushed through volatile should ever change any
> user interfaces or programmatic interface. (How paranoid
> developers are expected to be in ensuring this is negotiable,
> but it must at least be the *goal* that no interfaces change.)
> An update of mozilla-browser would be appropriate for volatile if it
> did not change the upstream codebase, but, say, updated the default
> SSL root certificate set in response to announcements from a
> well-known CA.
> An update that fixed the default style sheet to include new tags
> from XHTML 2.1, assuming that it was possible without code changes,
> would be borderline. Anything more involved than that - no thanks.
Sounds about right to me.