On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 08:59:31PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Kurt Roeckx: > > > I want to start by giving some examples of things that got updated > > in stable point releases that I know about: > > - linux was 3.2.41-2 in 7.0, 3.2.51-1 in 7.3, 3.2.53-2 in > > proposed-updates > > - iceweasel was 10.0.12esr-1 in 7.0, is now 17.0.10esr-1~deb7u1 > > - postgresql-9.1 was 9.1.9-1, now 9.1.11-0wheezy1 > > > > Clearly new upstream releases are acceptable under some > > conditions. But it's not clear to me what those conditions are. > > There's not a consistent set. For some packages, we end up with new > upstream versions because we have not much choice and would otherwise > have to remove the package. iceweasel from your list falls into this > category, and there have been BIND and OpenJDK updates with similar > rationale. > > If upstream has long-term stable versions with really limited changes > (your linux and postgresql-9.1 examples), we may use them instead of > rolling our own releases, based on the assumption that the released > version has seen some testing upstream and elsewhere, more than our > backport of a patch in isolation would receive prior to a release in a > Debian update.
So I have the impression that if upstream has a stable branch and really only do bug fixes with a low chance of regressions that this will most likely be accepted. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
