Le Monday 14 July 2008 11:48:04 Stefano Zacchiroli, vous avez écrit : > On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 03:16:20PM +0200, Romain Beauxis wrote: > > By the way, I would propose that we don't backport ocaml unless there is > > a major reason for doing it. This would really ease all other backports, > > and release the need to backport *all* stable ocaml modules against the > > backported ocaml. > > > > What does the team think of this ? > > Written as this it sounds like an undeniable desirable property :-) > I mean: how do you define a "major reason"? The only reason I see, ever, > for a backport of ocaml is a new upstream release. Our upstream rarely > does releases for silly reasons, and releases tend to stay stable for > several months. > > Is a new upstream release a major reason in your opinion?
If we backport each upstream release, then there's no point in putting on a backport policy like I proposed... A constructive argument could be established by discussing the changelog of the upstream releases. But even the memory bug on amd64 doesn't seem sufficient to me. Romain -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
