Re: RFD: Draft for a volatile.d.o policy

[Sven Mueller <sm@leogic.com>]

Frank Küster [u] wrote on 10/10/2004 19:17:


>> Sven Mueller <sm@leogic.com> wrote:
>
>>>>======================================================================
>>>>
>>>>Draft for a volatile.debian.org packaging and update policy.
>
>> [...]
>
>>>>Policy for v.d.o
>
>> [...]
>
>>>>- A new version uploaded to v.d.o should restrict itself to new code
>>>>   which is needed to keep fulfilling the original task of the package
>>>>   when it first entered v.d.o.
>
>>
>> Why not: "of the package when the last stable distribution was
>> released"?


Quite simple:
Say a new open source network security scanner enters the world, and it
works well when compiled against Debian stable, we might want to add it
to v.d.o even though it wasn't available when the last stable
distribution was released.
Or a new version of clamav is released, which sadly breaks
compatibility, so we rename it to clamav2 and it can still be released
through v.d.o, similarly to exim4 entering debian alongside exim a while
ago.


>> Besides that, it sounds quite well.


Thanks.

BTW: I am prepared to help volatile.d.o to spring to life as much as
possible. This includes helping to keep orphaned packages up-to-date in
v.d.o if the need arises for some reason. This also might include
working on a sort of security team for v.d.o (I think both jobs should
actually be combined in v.d.o). IANDD though, but if needed, I will
apply to become one.

cu,
sven



PS: Sorry for also sending this reply in private, didn't mean to do that.