On Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 10:26:40PM +0200, Jesus Climent wrote: > On Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 08:59:22PM +0100, paddy wrote: > > > > How would one decide which features to backport, and which not? > > The ones that the maintainer of the package decides is the best for > keeping the package which will update in stable usable, as long as the > packages is created against stable, is complying the policy created for such a > repository and everything is consistant.
Maintainer decides subject to archive policy seems reasonable enough. I fear though that my earlier suggestion of a feed into proposed-updates would run up against policy for the stable archives. If such a feed were felt to be desirable then compromises necessary to achieve that might be a consideration. > The user might decide to use or not to use such a repository, but for the > interest of the users, it might be better than leave them with 2.20 in woody > or having to refer to backports.org, which is not having such a release > policy. Agreed. Regards, Paddy > J > > -- > Jesus Climent info:www.pumuki.org > Unix SysAdm|Linux User #66350|Debian Developer|2.4.27|Helsinki Finland > GPG: 1024D/86946D69 BB64 2339 1CAA 7064 E429 7E18 66FC 1D7F 8694 6D69 > > I'll see my lawyer about this as soon as he graduates from law school! > --Rufus T. Firefly (Duck Soup) > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
