Re: Debian desktop -situation, proposals for discussion and change. Users point of view.

[Don Armstrong <don@debian.org>]

On Thu, 17 May 2007, Mgr. Peter Tuharsky wrote:
> This is closest to "backports" and "volatile" idea. I wouldn't call
> it "backports" however, because that reminds porting some very new
> software to some very old platform, and this is not the case. The
> stable's basic platform should stay LSB-compliant and
> "moderately-aged" (supported by all main software vendors) for the
> whole length of release cycle. Thus the new versions of desktop
> software wouldn't be "backported"; just compiled against ordinary,
> stable platform.

That's precisely what a backport is. New versions of a Debian package
compiled against stable with whatever changes are required to get them
to compile. If the root of the concern is because the term "backport"
is scary or otherwise unpalatable, then suggest an alternative term.


Don Armstrong

-- 
The attackers hadn't simply robbed the bank. They had carried off
everything portable, including the security cameras, the carpets, the
chairs, and the light and plumbing fixtures. The conspirators had
deliberately punished the bank, for reasons best known to themselves,
or to their unknown controllers. They had superglued doors and
shattered windows, severed power and communications cables, poured
stinking toxins into the wallspaces, and concreted all of the sinks
and drains. In eight minutes, sixty people had ruined the building so
thouroughly that it had to be condemed and later demolished.
 -- Bruce Sterling, _Distraction_ p4

http://www.donarmstrong.com              http://rzlab.ucr.edu