Re: chromium not in Squeeze: a bit of communication needed?
On 2010-09-08 16:10 +0200, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 13:48:49 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>> I've been following the chromium-browser saga a bit, who has ended up
>> with the removal of the package from testing [1,2]. While I'm a
>> chromium-browser user myself, and hence I'm saddened of seeing it go,
>> I'm not here to question the choice as I'm sure it's been made as the
>> right one and that it hasn't been an easy one to make.
>>
>> [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2010/09/msg00582.html
>> [2] http://www.iuculano.it/en/linux/debian/chromium-browser-removed-from-testing/
>>
>> Still I think we need, as Debian, to communicate about that choice. As
>> you can imagine, I particularly care about that as sooner or later
>> someone will ask me « why Debian doesn't ship Chromium? », and I'd like
>> to know the right answer to that question, so that I can provide it,
>> rather than offering my personal view only :-)
>> That's all I care about. [3]
>
> I think that this need is justification to declare backports "officially
> supported by the debian project". Thus when asked this question, you
> can point to the fact that chromium is indeed supported on stable, just
> via a different model than folks are used to. That is of course
> assuming someone is willing to support the backport.
It also means that users need to be taught how to change the apt pinning
priority for backports, because in the default configuration backported
packages are never updated automatically. Which is very bad from a
security point of view.
Sven
Reply to: