This one time, at band camp, Jim Popovitch said: > On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 14:33, Stephen Gran <sgran@debian.org> wrote: > > backports.org is an unofficial service, and is more free to break working > > configurations on upgrade or othewise introduce incompatibilities. It's > > down to the maintainers judgement which repo suits a given upload better. > > Well, there seems to be no consistency in the thoughts behind the > maintainers decisions. Perhaps Debian should provide some guidance? I'd personally prefer to let maintainers make a judgment call than to make a hard and fast policy about it. YMMV, of course. > Another example, look at mod-security, it's got current stable > (etch) pkgs in backports, and unstable packages in main. Maybe I'm > not following the logic behind these decisions, if someone can point > me to an FAQ I would appreciate it much. mod-security was removed from lenny for licensing reasons, IIRC. Nothing to do with the issue under discussion. Cheers, -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- | ,''`. Stephen Gran | | : :' : sgran@debian.org | | `. `' Debian user, admin, and developer | | `- http://www.debian.org | -----------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature