Hi Luk, On Wednesday 22 April 2009, Luk Claes wrote: > Bart Martens wrote: > > I have updated bug report 457291 "flashplugin-nonfree: decision > > 2007-12-21: keep this package out of stable starting with lenny". > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=457291 > > > > I hereby invite you to evaluate how my newest comments on that bug > > report match or conflict with your policies, and to share your thoughts > > with me, replies preferably sent to 457291-qu...@bugs.debian.org . > > I want to have a more general solution, so instead of focusing on > flashplugin-nonfree, I'd rather want to have a common policy for stable, > volatile and backports so it would be very clear for everyone how things > are supported and where to find updates. > > I've requested a slot at DebConf to discuss this into detail, though > feel free to start a discussion already on debian-devel.
sorry for coming around with another issue. While reading your comment without giving any details about your ideas, I don't know if our problem maybe related, sorry if not. There are many packages, which are frequently removed from testing right before the release, cause of (potential) security issues and not getting in worries with the security team. Other packages may be obsoleted by upstream and lose their support. This is often the case for web applications. We had something in mind we summarized at http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/Webapps. Maybe you can consider our issue in your thoughts. Thanks and with kind regards, Jan. -- Never write mail to <w...@spamfalle.info>, you have been warned! -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GIT d-- s+: a- C+++ UL++++ P+ L+++ E- W+++ N+++ o++ K++ w--- O M V- PS PE Y++ PGP++ t-- 5 X R tv- b+ DI- D++ G++ e++ h-- r+++ y+++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
