Re: RFC: Why are so many debian packages outdated?
On Thu, 2012-07-12 at 23:47 +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
> Adding debian-devel to the recipients. I think the question belongs
> On Thu, 2012-07-12 at 21:39 +0000, Bart Martens wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 11:25:47PM +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2012-07-13 at 00:20 +0300, Timo Juhani Lindfors wrote:
> > > > Svante Signell <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > > > > NMUs should be made/allowed/encouraged? I know all packaging is made by
> > > > > volunteers at their spare time, but anyway. Debian is one of the best
> > > > > distributions, what about raising the bar a little higher?
> > > >
> > > > The only way you can really improve the situation is to help with the
> > > > packages.
> > >
> > > I already have (with patches to bug reports), but becoming a Debian
> > > maintainer I have not yet applied for. Maybe doing some packaging, and
> > > ask for a sponsor will be a good way to get involved more, as a start.
> > Yes, doing some packaging via a sponsor is a way to immediately start
> > contributing to Debian.
> What to do if the maintainer is unresponsive? Ask somebody else to do
> the upload, or pinging the maintainer again? Alternatives (what about
> wine 1.2++)
I think this issue is very relevant to Wheezy. Why are there so many
outdated packages going into this release? The whole idea of unstable is
(to my understanding) to package the latest upstream releases, and get
the bugs squeezed out, right? And when the freeze happens, the latest
stable software is available to the next Debian release. Or is this
reasoning completely wrong? Please tell if the Debian goals are
different from the above. Maybe I have misunderstood the whole idea of