Re: Preparing the next Release
- To: debian-release@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Preparing the next Release
- From: Moritz Muehlenhoff <jmm@inutil.org>
- Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 22:20:48 +0200
- Message-id: <[🔎] slrnefeh50.65b.jmm@inutil.org>
- References: <20060826121810.GA4365@azure.humbug.org.au> <874pvzcwfu.fsf@glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com> <20060827232225.GS21208@verizon.net> <20060828051908.GA15188@mauritius.dodds.net> <20060828111403.GG24303@mathom.us> <20060829060736.GA5715@mauritius.dodds.net> <20060830110827.GF11120@finlandia.home.infodrom.org> <20060831004837.GK15823@mauritius.dodds.net>
Steve Langasek wrote:
> Another transition that today is in an earlier stage is the
> mozilla->xulrunner transition. I've asked on #debian-release what people
> thought should be done if seamonkey isn't packaged in time for etch --
> should mozilla and all its reverse-deps be dropped because it's not
> security-supportable, or should they be kept rather than removing what's
> still a large number of packages with a large install base? Does the answer
> to this question change with the number of reverse-dependencies still
> remaining?
We can't support Mozilla suite. As we cannot ship known vulnerable,
unsupported software all software build-depending on mozilla-dev that
cannot be fixed to use xulrunner-dev must be removed or drop the
functionality using mozilla-dev (as we did for OO.org's address book
in a DSA; current OO.org uses libxul).
Cheers,
Moritz
Reply to: