Re: RFS: scribus
On Fri, Feb 20, 2004 at 11:36:33 -0500, O. Moskalenko wrote:
> * Martin Godisch <email@example.com> [2004-02-20 17:12:12 +0100]:
> > I suggest to put 1.1.5 into unstable/testing and 1.2.0~cvs into
> > experimental.
> CVS is stable. Frankly, the release is pretty much a CVS snapshot. 1.2.0
> will be released around the end of April, so it will probably happen way
> before sarge is out. I think that the effort is better spent working out
> problems due to the clash of debian and upstream policy on executable
> libs and non-FHS file placement then on maintaining two separate
> versions. Please tell my why it is not so if you think contrary.
I don't say you're wrong. It's more a matter of personal taste. I don't
like CVS snapshot packages, think the upstream author should know when
to release. As a user, I like released software on my system. It's also
a question how the CVS tree is handled between releases. I cannot speak
for scribus, and if you're the Debian maintainer it's your decision.