Re: Backports upgrade policy (ButAutomaticUpdates:yes)
On 24/01/13 07:48, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Joerg Jaspert <firstname.lastname@example.org> [2013.01.24.2017
>>> And say that a year later 2.3 comes out and it's the bee's
>>> knees because it fully replaces 1.1 except that the
>>> configuration cannot be automatically migrated, and all the
>>> power users on #debian-devel persuade you to backport it, what
>>> do you do?
>> Backport it. Thats one of the points backports is for. I would
>> actually ask wth 2.2 wasn't backported before.
> Because 2.0 drops a feature you need and introduces some bugs.
> Also, the configuration needs a lot of manual work to
It sounds as though in this situation, you'd either want foo-1 and
foo-2 to be parallel-installable (in which case they could coexist in
backports), or something technically similar to an Ubuntu PPA,
containing foo 1.x backports?