> the addition of new suites has the disadvantage of dispersing our userbase. > Here is a proposition that conserves the current flow of package migration for > packages released in Stable, and that makes Testing the meeting point for all > the packages.
> We could introduce a new priority level, ‘backports’, with the following > features: This whole thing does not make sense at all. Priority is the wrong knob. > This priority level would be lower than ‘extra’. Higher levels would not be > allowed to depend nor build-depend on packages of priority ‘backports’. > Source > packages would not be allowed to contain a mixture binary packages containing > ‘backports’ level and higher priorities. > These packages would not be released in Stable, but would be uploaded to > Unstable and migrate in Testing as usual, with the exception that they would > not be affected by a freeze. They could be removed by default from Testing in > case they block a transition. > As the name indicates, the packages which prove their stability in Testing > (and only them, as in the current backports rules) would be backported in > backports.debian.org. The backports would be prepared by the maintainers > themselves (this would open a way to the use of the BTS) and would be the > final > distribution medium for Stable users. So what backports "priority" actually says is "my package is such a bullshit that I don't want it ever released, but I am fine with putting burden on the people keeping backports running instead". I think we have a way already dealing with this: Don't upload them. -- bye, Joerg 'To Start Press Any Key'. Where's the ANY key? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87vd5xszdd....@gkar.ganneff.de
