Hi Tony, On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 09:49:02AM -0700, tony mancill wrote: [..snip..] > My concern is not that we don't have the proper channels through which > to deliver, but that each means another release to support. In this > model we have (at a minimum) unstable, stable-security (which requires > back-porting of security patches), and stable-backports (which means all > dependencies must also appear in stable-backports). > > With the current participation in the Java Team, it often feels like > we're barely able (or not) to keep up with RC/FTBFS bugs and upstream > releases for unstable. Supporting stable-backports is another ask that > is potentially very time-consuming.
I feel your pain. Another way to cope with that is to keep more packages out of stable. This wouldn't violate the stable guarantees so if you pick a package out of testing/sid (e.g. by pinning) you know that you're leaving the stable realm. This would also mark a clear entry point for new contributors that are interested in a particular application. I've done that for several packages, some times it works out well and somebody steps up to help maintaining it, sometimes it doesn't. Cheers, -- Guido -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140324080259.ga2...@bogon.m.sigxcpu.org
