Wichert Akkerman wrote: > Previously Santiago Vila wrote: > > Is this to be considered "distribution-wise"? > > i.e. Is this to be applied to hamm, slink, potato, in an independent way? > > I think so, because packages that may be required in release N could > be obsolete in release N+1 and deserve a lower priority there. > > Wichert (wondering if he missed something here)
What you're missing is that Mr. Vila is looking for more fuel for submitting bugreports. His latest theory is that it's not enough if priorities are correct in the unstable distribution; he wants to be able to hop up and down until we change them in frozen and stable as well. Richard Braakman, getting thoroughly fed up.
