Hi, Olaf:
On Tuesday 01 February 2011 17:18:58 Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> 2011/2/1 Jesús M. Navarro :
> > So, may I propose (if not already done) a document that outlines with
> > enough detail what Debian maintenance policy is and why from an upstream
> > point of view, and then allow for within
2011/2/1 Jesús M. Navarro :
> So, may I propose (if not already done) a document that outlines with enough
> detail what Debian maintenance policy is and why from an upstream point of
> view, and then allow for within Stable upgrades for software that has
> demonstrated to pursue the same standards
Hi, Ian:
On Tuesday 01 February 2011 14:11:44 Ian Jackson wrote:
> Thijs Kinkhorst writes ("Re: Upstream "stable" branches and Debian freeze"):
> > In the past such things have not been allowed with the argumentation that
> > even though stable may contain bug
On 2011-02-01, Ian Jackson wrote:
> This argument seems very absolutist and would seem to suggest we
> should never do any stable release updates at all. But a user who
> wants that level of stability can simply not take the stable release
> updates, and only apply the security updates.
That's n
Thijs Kinkhorst writes ("Re: Upstream "stable" branches and Debian freeze"):
> In the past such things have not been allowed with the argumentation that
> even though stable may contain bugs, users rely on the behaviour that
> stable has. They may know about a bug
On Tue, 01 Feb 2011, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Mon, January 31, 2011 18:09, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> > However, upstream's policy in their "stable" branches is alway to only
> > fix "important" bugs (they don't call them this way...but the
> > definition is fairly close to Debian's). So, *in th
On Mon, January 31, 2011 18:09, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> However, upstream's policy in their "stable" branches is alway to only
> fix "important" bugs (they don't call them this way...but the
> definition is fairly close to Debian's). So, *in the case of samba*, I
> can guarantee that the user's
]] Samuel Thibault
Hi,
| His question could be rephrased: will the 6.0.x updates be allowed to
| pick up new upstream "stable" fixes releases?
While I can't speak for the release team (neither the stable or the
«regular» one), I know that postgresql stable releases are generally
allowed into ne
Quoting Max Kellermann (m...@duempel.org):
> I'm the upstream maintainer of the Music Player Daemon project, and
> receive a number of support requests / bug reports from Debian users
> who use the outdated version 0.15.12 of "mpd", currently in testing.
> These bugs were already fixed in newer ma
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 15:25:11 +0100, Max Kellermann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm the upstream maintainer of the Music Player Daemon project, and
> receive a number of support requests / bug reports from Debian users
> who use the outdated version 0.15.12 of "mpd", currently in testing.
> These bugs were al
Michal Čihař, le Mon 31 Jan 2011 16:01:54 +0100, a écrit :
> Dne Mon, 31 Jan 2011 15:25:11 +0100
> Max Kellermann napsal(a):
>
> > I'm the upstream maintainer of the Music Player Daemon project, and
> > receive a number of support requests / bug reports from Debian users
> > who use the outdated
Hi
Dne Mon, 31 Jan 2011 15:25:11 +0100
Max Kellermann napsal(a):
> I'm the upstream maintainer of the Music Player Daemon project, and
> receive a number of support requests / bug reports from Debian users
> who use the outdated version 0.15.12 of "mpd", currently in testing.
> These bugs were a
Hi,
I'm the upstream maintainer of the Music Player Daemon project, and
receive a number of support requests / bug reports from Debian users
who use the outdated version 0.15.12 of "mpd", currently in testing.
These bugs were already fixed in newer maintenance releases.
I know that Debian does no
13 matches
Mail list logo
