* Daniel Baumann [Wed, 05 Nov 2008 19:24:14 +0100]: > Adeodato Simó wrote: > > I know Daniel doesn't agree, so I'll wait a couple days before > > proceeding with the removal in case he wants to provide a good rationale > > as for why this package (in its current version) should be part of a > > stable Debian release. Daniel?
> since the description clearly states that it is experimental, it's > better to have it in than out because it makes backporting easier > (limits interdiffs), gets more attention by people. What is the action to take if a user installs btrfs in stable, finds a "data loss" bug, and reports it as grave? "Sorry, although you installed this from stable this software is experimental and you should've read the description and anyway the bug you report does not happen in the version in backports.org."? > however, there is no point having btrfs in without btrfs-tools, and for > btrfs-tools see http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=495562#46 That is moot because, should I change my opinion about btrfs, I'd let btrfs-tools back. -- Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es Debian Developer adeodato at debian.org Any life, no matter how long and complex it may be, is made up of a single moment: the moment in which a man finds out, once and for all, who he is. -- Jorge Luis Borges -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
