Re: timezone data packaged separately and in volatile?

[Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org>]

* Anand Kumria (wildfire@progsoc.uts.edu.au) [060207 09:52]:
> On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 09:13:07AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > * Anand Kumria (wildfire@progsoc.uts.edu.au) [060207 04:34]:
> > > I also think volatile is precisely the wrong place to put this kind of 
> > > data -- it isn't part of the default apt.sources for one thing; and it 
> > > places an extra burden on the maintainer(s) (who know have to track
> > > three different upgrade paths, etc.).
> > 
> > Only because you have a prejudice against volatile doesn't mean its the
> > wrong place. Volatile is rather the exactly right place for this kind of
> > update.
> 
> It is precisely the wrong place because volatile isn't in
> apt.sources by default. If it were, it'd be a different story.

You mean, we better don't do anything than to accept packages into a
repository that is actually in apt.sources on a lot of machines, even on
the debian.org-machines?

> As it is, volatile is a great solution in search of a problem.  It is 
> unfortunate that you, and others, seem to latch onto things like as a 
> reason to make volatile useful.

You mean, like accepting a new locale package into volatile? Ah, that's
you who don't like it.


Cheers,
Andi
-- 
  http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/