Michael Gilbert wrote: > A an option in the installer like volatile/security should address a > lot of this concern. Unless it installs the package from backports, the most the installer can do is eliminate one or two of the three or four things users must do to use it. All my comments about user discoverability/usability still apply. > > If backports are really officially supported, and we encourage users to > > install a web browser from them, which is not available in stable, how > > is that truely different than shipping the same web browser in stable? > > The difference is that there is no arduous backporting/dsa process to > push that update If we're encouraging users to install a web browser from an officially supported part of Debian, then the security support requirements are not lessened *at all*. -- see shy jo
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature