* Christian Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 12:31:06PM +0200, Peter Feuerer wrote: > > I think it would not be much effort, and you'll give the users the > > choice of sticking to a release or not. So the question is, why not? The > > only reason I see to not doing this is because of the diskspace this > > "additional" packages need. > > And if the releases are just there for easier installations, why do you > > still keep older releases?
History ;) > You don't seem to understand. "Sticking" to a release means a lot more > than just keeping old packages. What do you think why Distributions like > Ubuntu, SuSE, RH and suchlike spend so much time on? QA, of course. > Sticking to a release needs, if done the right way, infrastructure and a > lot of manpower. If one just keeps old packages, a shitload of problems > will emerge. Think of unfixed security-issues and the likes. If you want > to volunteer for QA, go for it. In the meantime, I don't think that this > will happen in Arch. You are right. Such a thing should _not_ happen in arch. -- regards, TR
pgpesfEFLNsp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ arch mailing list [email protected] http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
