Re: Rethinking stable updates policy
Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> Martin Schulze wrote:
> > It would be good, though, especially in order to have some support for
> > hardware that has entered the market after the last Debian release, if
> > there would be an outside repository for updated kernel and installer
> > packages. However, nobody considered this important enough yet.
> > (Hint! Hint!)
> Not quite: Some people met at Debconf (including Frans, aba, Dann and me)
> to discuss a potential solution to the hardware problem. Dann sent a report
> around, didn't you get it?
I don't know. I have to admit that I have very bad memory and forget
a lot of things. Even if I should have replied to it, that doesn't
mean I'd remember it. So... Dunno...
> The rough plan is to provide an alternative set of updated kernel packages
> and potentially also xservers (depending on how modular the new X.org
> modulization really is) nine months after Etch release. Everyone who has
Oh, that one. I've heard about it before. I consider it a good idea.
> installed regular Etch would stay with it and those requiring it could
> choose it instead (possibly through an etch-update apt source). However
> all fine details need to be sorted out and for now the priority should be
> to release Etch on the 4th of December.
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct,
not tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth