[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: chromium not in Squeeze: a bit of communication needed?



On Wed, Sep  8, 2010 at 14:15:26 -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:

> As for the need for pinning, that can be solved by judiciously choosing
> package names.  The current instructions say to append '~bpo' to all
> packages, which makes backport versions older than stable versions.  For
> chromium and other fast-moving packages that should stay up to date, the
> instructions could say to use '+bpo' which would make that a newer
> version than stable.
> 
> Again, it should be up to the ftpmaster to review and OK (via request)
> all '+bpo' uploads due to the risk of breakage on automatic updates.
> Combine this solution with disabling 'NotAutomatic', and I think all of
> the concerns are addressed.  Thoughts?
> 
That makes absolutely no sense.  Package names and package version
numbers are not the same thing.  And backports already have higher
versions than stable, that's kind of the whole point.

Cheers,
Julien

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: