Re: Upstream "stable" branches and Debian freeze
2011/2/1 Jesús M. Navarro <email@example.com>:
> So, may I propose (if not already done) a document that outlines with enough
> detail what Debian maintenance policy is and why from an upstream point of
> view, and then allow for within Stable upgrades for software that has
> demonstrated to pursue the same standards as Debian? Kindof a "quality seal"
> that will allow to push minor versions: it would mean "more with less" since
> Debian maintainers wouldn't need to maintain their own patch sets and they
> would know in advance what the "proper" version to pack for Stable is (the
> one that upstream publishes for long term maintenance within the time-frame
> for the new Stable version). For those upstreamers interested in doing the
> things the proper way, they could find Debian people to be knowledgeable and
> helpful about it (since they've been doing it for years and it's in their own
It depends on the kind of package and computer whether it makes sense.
For production servers, stability is (way) more important.
For desktop users and packages like browsers, which might be fast
moving, new features might be more important.
Upstream for Firefox and Chrome are not going to provide stable
branches that are maintained for two+ years.