Eduard Bloch <edi@gmx.de> writes: > #include <hallo.h> > * Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt [Sun, Sep 14 2008, 12:05:54AM]: >> Eduard Bloch <edi@gmx.de> writes: >> > apt-cacher-ng was frozen in Lenny at the revision 0.2.2-1. >> > Unfortunatelly, this happened in the middle of a major rewrite, which I >> > consider almost finished with current Sid version. >> >> When we've frozen lenny, we planned to not include any more disruptive >> changes - a major rewrite is such a change we would like to avoid if >> possible. From what I can see in the BTS, the version currently in lenny >> works fine, so the risk of breaking anything by including an unfinished >> major rewrite seems unreaonsably high. > > Wait a second, how can you think it's "just fine" I haven't said that, read again. There's no release critical bug reported against the version in lenny. However, that version *has* had sufficient testing to assume that every serious bug should have been noticed until now. You propose to replace this tested version by a major rewrite. From your point of view as author and maintainer, that might seem like a reasonable idea - from my point of view, it's not. > And sorry for going ad hominem but that's just like a slap in my face. Yes, I love these discussions too. Friendly, Marc -- BOFH #309: firewall needs cooling
Attachment:
pgpHfn_PD_RWI.pgp
Description: PGP signature