Re: about volatile.d.o/n

[Martin Schulze <joey@infodrom.org>]

Florian Weimer wrote:
> >> 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? ;)
> 
> Mozilla, GnuPG, and maybe even PHP 4, depending on sarge's lifetime.
> Other complex packages can easily enter this state, too, especially
> when sarge has been around for a year or two.
> 
> Actually, Mozilla's situation is beginning to look rather promising.
> The distributor community seems to pick up the challenge and issue
> patches.  Of course, if we release 1.6 with sarge (a version that is
> officially unsupported by upstream), we might not be able to profit
> from this development.

This sounds more like a backports issue than anything that should go
into volatile if the intention of volatile shouldn't be changed (and
I hope it won't).

Regards,

	Joey

-- 
Those who don't understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly.

Please always Cc to me when replying to me on the lists.