On 11/05/2009 02:37 PM, Lee Azzarello wrote: > +1 for backports. I deal with the same issues in production. the backports process is also worth keeping in mind for folks who are packagers (even if they don't backport), because the standard backports process (at least as i practice it) has trouble dealing with use of the newest and fanciest packaging tools. so once a packager has seen the difficulties with trying to backport a package built with bleeding-edge packaging tools, they're more likely to consider the effects on backporters. Also, it is useful in terms of thinking about the role source packages play in the larger ecosystem (e.g. to answer the question: "why do we need to put versioned dependencies on package if that version is already in testing?") so that's a +1 on backports workflow from me too. --dkg
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ DebianNYC mailing list DebianNYC@vireo.org http://lists.vireo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debiannyc