Am Montag, 14. Juli 2008 schrieb Ana Guerrero:
> a) Use backports.org, i do not like this too much because:
>
> cons:
>   -you need to wait until package is in testing to backport it

That might not be a bad thing, because it ensures that the packages that you 
backport actually fit together and are synchronized and have had a minimal 
amount of public testing.

>   -packages go to NEW until they are hand approved

Yes, but that is quite fast in my experience.

>   -users will fear to push more stuff than just KDE 4.1.x

Backports are not automatically installed, so this fear is irrational (albeit 
not unreasonable).  A lot of users use backports.org successfully.

Which brings me to the main point:  Many users are familiar with 
backports.org, and it has a semi-official status in the Debian community.  So 
why not build on that?  In fact, even if you choose not to use backports.org, 
someone else might end up doing backports.org backports anyway, because they 
prefer that infrastructure.  Such divergence can be avoided.

-- 
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk

Reply via email to