Neil Williams wrote: > On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 14:33 +0300, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote: >> Reinhard Tartler wrote: [snip] >>> http://patch-tracking.debian.net/package/ffmpeg-debian >> Well, how can users go this site? Is it described in debian policy, >> devreference, some user docs? > > It could be linked from the PTS maybe - i.e. package specific - and then > mentioned in the Debian Developer Reference or linked from > http://www.uk.debian.org/devel/ under Miscellaneous. In most cases, > upstream teams should be able to get the majority of the data needed > from the PTS using http://packages.qa.debian.org/$package and then the > BTS. Yes, this would be good anyway. >> (suppose) I'm a system administrator. I have received new production >> mail server. My only choice is a stable well-maintained distribution. >> Last release for RedHat contains exim 1.5.19, and Debian version is >> 1.5.18. I know about recently found security bug in 1.5.18. What >> distribution I will choose without official acknowledge that Debian's >> source for 1.5.18 already have a backported fix for bug? > >> Well, for security bugs Debian have DSAs. But for other non-security >> fixes and improvements came to stable release? > > BTS and online changelogs linked from the PTS ? For upstream, for Debian people - enough. My proposal is to make user-oriented list. Long changelog entries with some inner packaging info and other stuff and viewing dozen of patches (even with good comments) imho, is not what user have to do to answer on the simple questions "Have Debian version of package foo, version x.y.z the fix for A?" and "Have Debian version of package foo, version x.y.z the feature B?". -- Eugene V. Lyubimkin aka JackYF
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature