On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 07:03:04PM +0100, Michael Meskes wrote:
> > Because eventually a future version will come out that doesn't work
> > with
> > the stable base, at which point we suddenly stop supporting the
> > package.
> > That's much worse than just admitting up front that we can't support
> > the
> > package for the next 4 years.
> Let's agree to disagree. I find it perfectly fine if we told people up
> front that we support it as long as upstream has a version that works
> with the stable base. They are still better or at least not worse of
> with that than with a self-installed one.
They are not.
Ideally Debian should provide and support the software, but support that
might suddenly go away without any clear option forward is the worst
option Debian could offer.
What is the user supposed to do when Debian announces that some
software essential for that user is no longer supported in the
stable release the user is using?
At that point the options for the user are either to continue using
software that might already have known grave vulnerabilities, or to
do a rushed attempt trying to find some way to self-install an upstream
version that is still supported.
This is clearly worse than using a self-installed version from the
start, which gives the user the knowledge how to use the self-installed
version (that might differ from how Debian provides the software) and
gives a clear picture from the start when upgrades to new major versions
will have to be planned.
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed