On Fri, 30 Aug 2019, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, 30 Aug 2019, Alexander Wirt wrote: > > > We're not speaking of crap software, we're just speaking of software that > > > can't be maintained multiple years by backports of security patches, where > > > we get fixes only with new upstream versions (mixed with new features). > > I don't want to draw that line, someone would have decide if the software is > > just crap, the maintainer too lazy or if its really fast pacing. Wordpress > > is > > an example of a software that should really be supported within stable. If > > not its just crap. > > > > Imho we should have packages in testing that will not be part of the next > > release. And we don't want any form of automated migrations. Full stop. > > People should build and *test* their packages against stable. > > I don't know if I'm expressing myself very badly, but there's clearly a > misunderstanding. > > Right now there is no "stable" release where you would build packages for > bullseye-backports. If you keep the same logic of building next release > packages against the current release, then for bullseye-backports that > would mean building packages from unstable in a testing environment. I have a problem with your definition(s). There is no bullseye-backports yet and it will only be available short before its release. Backports is meaned to support a stable release.
Alex
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
