On 2014-11-13 02:59, Andreas Bombe wrote: > Hi release team, > Hi Andreas,
> [...] > > It is *technically* non-essential, but if it doesn't work (because the > package is too old) users start to complain quickly, some even > considering the package unusable without this feature. > > Unfortunately upstream is rather quick to break (intentionally, > apparently) older versions after releasing a new version of his > software. The server already refuses to sync with 2.0.30. > That is indeed unfortunate. > > There's already some discussion for similar packages on debian-devel, > but without specific results beyond asking the release team. Well, what > are my options here to get this package fully working into stable? It is > a leaf package, so would asking for a freeze exemption for this new > upstream release (and any more that come up before the release) just get > me a death glare by the complete release team? > > > Andreas > > >From my point of view, it sounds like using -backports might be a better in the long run if upstream insists on forcing us to ship the newest version[1]. Though the lost functionality being a non-essential feature, I see no problem in keeping 2.0.30 in Jessie - maybe with a warning in the documentation that people should use backports version if they want to use the sync'ing feature. ~Niels [1] Note that the backports FTP masters may disagree with my view here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: https://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
