On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 11:11:31PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > Steve Langasek wrote: > >> >flashplugin-nonfree is still unusable in stable :-( > > > >> >Remove the package from etch or upload a fixed version? > >> >I vote for the later. > > > >> So can you please either show that the fixed tarball would only have few > >> differences with the existing one or that the new version is tested > >> enough to be considered? > > > > Does this imply that non-free packages in stable are to be held to the same > > standard for change review by the SRMs as other stable updates, even when > > this means security fixes are not possible? > > For Etch I'd recommend to lower the standards and allow a new version even > it's new upstream. With proprietary software you just can't expect the > comfort and maintainability of free software.
I agree; though I also think its worth asking the vendor to help us support our mutual userbase (if we haven't already) - specifically by asking them to maintain a bugfix-only series. > However, for sid and eventually Lenny we should really get rid of the > proprietary Flash ASAP. It'll lead to people using/testing/fixing gnash > and prevent the same maintenance nightmare all over again. I would agree with you here if gnash was already a reasonable replacement - but I don't believe this is the case yet. Users are often willing to use/test/fix alternatives when they mostly work for them, but that's not been my experience with gnash (though my issues could also just be architecture-specific). But, I do believe that the current situation is not acceptable for a stable release since it sounds like bits may disappear arbitrarily and we've no mechanism for dealing with that in-between point releases. Without more coordination with upstream, it may be more appropriate to move this package to a different location - e.g. volatile. -- dann frazier -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
