On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 04:33:38PM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote: > On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Michael Meskes <mes...@debian.org> wrote: > > Anyhow, I doubt we can reasonably expect to maintain *all* packages for a > > longer > > period. How about starting with a defined list of packages that we do care > > about in an LTS? I would start with just the basic system and the most > > important server packages. > > Well, and how about starting to look at RFH for packages you care about > right now and help with security (and SPU) updates right now, even without > LTS?
How about not combining two different topics? I don't see a reason why a discussion about a way to provide LTS needs to get shot with the suggestion to help with some random package instead. Of course you definitely have a point in that some/a lot of packages need work, but I think it is also reasonable to discuss a strategy for a desirable (IMO) long-term goal. Michael -- Michael Meskes Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org) Michael at BorussiaFan dot De, Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org Jabber: michael.meskes at gmail dot com VfL Borussia! Força Barça! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130829120849.ga28...@feivel.credativ.lan
