On 21 June 2012 14:28, AL13N <[email protected]> wrote: >> Well, AFAIK there is still no stance on backports policy (are we >> backporting from cauldron >> (n) to n-2 or not - if we do, we break upgradability here!). >> Cherry-picking backports is >> needed. > > This is true, but has to be solved anyway, no bearing on this problem. and > cherry-picking should not be needed(since it's not supported), so that's a > different problem.
You claim that it's not supported. But cherry picking one backport is usually what people do. Denying the reality won't help you make progress...
