Re: volatile Suitability for Protocol Updates
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 12:57:52AM -0600, Brian Ryans wrote:
> On the page for volatile [3], it states:
>
> Some packages aim at fast moving targets, such as spam filtering and
> virus scanning
>
> This quote seems to imply that volatile is _not_ the proper place for
> package updates to fix protocol-change issues. [...]
>
> Though, my reading of another part of that same paragraph seems to imply
> that it is indeed the appropriate location:
>
> So debian-volatile will only contain changes to stable programs that
> are necessary to keep them functional.
Well, let's look at the history: IIRC during the Etch phase there was
a protocol change done by ICQ which IIRC required all clients to send
one additional or changed byte only. This has been fixed via volatile
IIRC.
BTW, another "protocol change" which bugs Lenny is that clive (one of
those youtube downloaders) doesn't work anymore in Lenny and therefore
seems completely useless in Lenny to me. IMHO this could also be a
case for volatile, if the necessary changes aren't too heavy,
e.g. if just changing the HTML patterns to look for suffices.
Kind regards, Axel Beckert
--
Axel Beckert <beckert@phys.ethz.ch> support: +41 44 633 26 68
IT Services Group, HPT D 17 voice: +41 44 633 41 89
Departement of Physics, ETH Zurich
CH-8093 Zurich, Switzerland http://nic.phys.ethz.ch/
Reply to: