Quoting Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt (he@ftwca.de): > Christian Perrier <bubulle@debian.org> writes: > > On request, I can provide (but probably not comment) the diff between > > both versions, stripped down to source code changes (95% of the full > > diff is made of documentation reformatting and RPM packaging > > changes). That diff is 178017 bytes long, in unified format. > > Please do. Sent in private to Marc (the .bz2 file is 30k) > > > The changelog for this release is fairly long: > [...] > > Yeah, this looks pretty big. Would it be reasonable to just extract the > more important bugfixes and apply them to the current package? I don't think so. Mostly because I personnally don't have such expertise. Steve Langasek could technically do this....maybe...at the expense of a huge amount of invested time he probably can't afford (and very probably doesn't want to even try). I'm not sure we would really benefit from this as that would mean having a version that's a mix between 3.2.3 and 3.2.4 and much less chances to get correct support from our upstream for security fixes. Our upstream is really committed since 3.2.0 to only put in the 3.2 branch fixes they consider to belong to a "stable" release. By experience after years of work with them is that their definition of stable is fairly close to our definition. I understand this is more a matter of trust than a matter of technical judgement. I assume such position. ;-)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature