On Tuesday 24 May 2005 19:23, Adrian von Bidder wrote: > In response to the recent volatile announcement, I posted to d-release > and saw only now that debian-doc is given as the relevant mailing list > at the top of the release note... > > I propose mentioning backports.org and apt-get.org in the release > notes; details and proposed text see > <http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2005/05/msg01525.html>. As neither of these services is new, I don't think they warrant inclusion in the Release Notes. If the project feels that apt-get.org and backports.org should be "promoted" (or warned against), I would suggest that the website is be the most logical place to do so. Maybe a discussion on debian-project on whether a clarification on all three sites should be published on www.debian.org would be the best start. Personally however, I see an important distinction between debian-volatile and the other two sites. Debian-volatile will be very restrictive and aims to guarantee compatibility with upgrades to new releases of Debian. It will also be fully maintained within the current release. apt-get.org and (possibly to a lesser degree) backports.org both are largely uncontrolled with a real risk of at least file conflicts occurring on a dist-upgrade to a next release. There is no guarantee, especially as a new release gets closer, that packages on both sites will still be maintained and upgrade paths from them to the next release tested. Cheers, FJP
Attachment:
pgp1z9QKr4RMe.pgp
Description: PGP signature