hi,
On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 06:42:28PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> Moreover, IMHO, keeping an older version of a web app come from 2
> reasons :
> * upgrade is too hard / too risky (in a wep app PoV)
> * ppl have customized / changed it a lot
>
> (2) is not of our concern
>
> (1) is sth we should work on.
agreed. with a solid policy in place, i think (1) becomes a moot
issue, as upgrading/downgrading webapps would be like anything else
in debian. for (2), i think that the packager should not have
to worry about that[1].
would hopefully not be much of a difficult thing to do.
> At least, if we have many apps in the archive (like rt does) there
> should have a strict policy, like :
> * not more than 'n' packages (n kept small like 3)
> * package *has* to be supported upstream or by the packager, with
> reasonnable reliability (especially wrt bugs >= important), else it
> has to be removed from the archive.
> * those package should not be apps that are trivial to upgrade (putting
> the fact that maybe users may have done changes aside)
yes, but i think this is not specific to webapps.
sean
--
[1] previous discussions of $magicutility could be applicable, but this
would in any event be outside the scope of the webapp's package, and
not something that policy/packagers would have to worry about.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature