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

Re: Description-less packages file

Philipp Kern <pkern@debian.org> (08/02/2012):
> On Wed, Feb 08, 2012 at 08:30:47AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > Regarding squeeze:  Could somebody give some reasons for refusing an
> > additional field in the Packages files?  It is hard to cope with "it
> > is unlikely".  A yes or no would be more helpful to find a
> > reasonable decision for the UDD importer.
> It possibly breaks stuff.  Like tasksel[1].  Sadly there are many
> implicit assumptions in a release, hence we're not switching on any
> new features in Packages/Sources/Contents post-release.

One recent example of stable-related collateral damage is the addition
of InRelease files. And even that shouldn't have happened©®™ given
squeeze was supposed not to be affected! We ended up having to perform
stable updates to cope with it.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: