Re: Removal of transitional dummy packages
On Mon, 18 Jul 2005, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> Santiago Vila <email@example.com> writes:
> > On Sun, 17 Jul 2005, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> >> On 10353 March 1977, Santiago Vila wrote:
> >>>> we need to remove
> >>>> from the archive all the Woody-to-Sarge transition dummy packages.
> >>> No, that's not true, we don't *need* to remove woody-to-sarge dummy
> >>> packages, as they are also woody-to-etch dummy packages.
> >> We do not support that.
> > There is no "we" here.
> Oh, there is! *We* ('Debian') have no policy to force maintainers to
> make direct upgrade paths from old releases possible, [...]
Unfortunately, we don't even have a policy to force maintainers to
make upgrade paths from the previous release possible (see Bug #196390).
If we are going to deliver consistently the message that upgrades that
skip releases are not supported and upgrades from the previous release
are supported, could we please agree that upgrades must be smooth, so
that a missing dummy package which makes a package not to be upgraded
as it is expected to be becomes a serious bug?