On Wed, 8 Apr 2009 05:10:12 pm Romain Beauxis wrote: > Le Tuesday 07 April 2009 22:59:00 Sebastien Delafond, vous avez écrit : > > On Apr/07, Mike Hommey wrote: > > > While I see why it can be needed for python, I fail to see how it is > > > important for jruby... > > > > to have 2 versions of jruby available ? I guess so you can at least, for > > instance, try the new one on your existing jruby code without removing > > the old one, for instance ? > > If we were to apply this policy to all software packaged in debian, that > would be a mess. It would be a security mess as well, I don't particularly want to fix the same issue in 2-4 packages ...
> > Are you advocating for only one instance of jruby at all times in the > > archive ? If so, why ? > > I think this is the other way round: by default there should be only one > version per package -- after all that is why we have package name and > package version.. > > Hence, it should be explained why multiple version of the same package are > relevant for Debian and its users. And I don't think that "testing several > versions" is a good explanation.. If a dozen (or more) packages really need the older version, then it could be discussed I guess (some details here would be nice). But I agree that having it around for "testing" reasons is not a valid reason. Cheers Steffen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
