on Sat, 1 Oct 2011 08:05 in the Usenet newsgroup gmane.linux.mageia.devel Maarten Vanraes wrote:
> Op vrijdag 30 september 2011 23:35:40 schreef Samuel Verschelde: >> Le jeudi 29 septembre 2011 21:10:42, Samuel Verschelde a écrit : [snip] >> > Also, the sooner we have backports, the less there will be external >> > third- party repos with all the problems (upgrade, support) that causes. >> > There already are, don't let them too much space and rather invite their >> > packagers to backport *inside* (as long as they stay within the policy >> > of course). [snip] >> If needed, the tremendous amount of packages in Blogdrake's 3rd party media >> shows how much backports are needed by users, whatever we as packagers can >> think of it. >> >> I'm still convinced that opening backports right now, using one of my 2 >> proposals (if I haven't overlooked a technical difficulty), would be an >> important step forward for us. >> >> Best regards >> >> Samuel > > I have to agree, if opening backports brings in more packagers who are likely > to integrate well AND bring in more users AND likely would step up and > maintain similar packages, we should help their effort and not get our > community too splintered, even though updates _is_ more important than > backports. Potentially silly idea: Would it be worth having backports-supported and backports-unsupported, or backports and backports-untested, or backports and backports-3rd-party? You could occasionally move things in either direction between supported and unsupported.
