Re: flashplugin-nonfree 9.0.48.0.1etch1 for Stable

[dann frazier <dannf@dannf.org>]

On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 11:11:31PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> Steve Langasek wrote:
> >> >flashplugin-nonfree is still unusable in stable :-(
> >
> >> >Remove the package from etch or upload a fixed version?
> >> >I vote for the later.
> >
> >> So can you please either show that the fixed tarball would only have few 
> >> differences with the existing one or that the new version is tested 
> >> enough to be considered?
> >
> > Does this imply that non-free packages in stable are to be held to the same
> > standard for change review by the SRMs as other stable updates, even when
> > this means security fixes are not possible?
> 
> For Etch I'd recommend to lower the standards and allow a new version even
> it's new upstream. With proprietary software you just can't expect the
> comfort and maintainability of free software.

I agree; though I also think its worth asking the vendor to help us
support our mutual userbase (if we haven't already) - specifically by
asking them to maintain a bugfix-only series.

> However, for sid and eventually Lenny we should really get rid of the
> proprietary Flash ASAP. It'll lead to people using/testing/fixing gnash
> and prevent the same maintenance nightmare all over again.

I would agree with you here if gnash was already a reasonable
replacement - but I don't believe this is the case yet. Users are
often willing to use/test/fix alternatives when they mostly work for
them, but that's not been my experience with gnash (though my issues
could also just be architecture-specific).

But, I do believe that the current situation is not acceptable for a
stable release since it sounds like bits may disappear arbitrarily and
we've no mechanism for dealing with that in-between point releases.

Without more coordination with upstream, it may be more appropriate to
move this package to a different location - e.g. volatile.

-- 
dann frazier