On 2016-07-19 16:47, nord-stream wrote:
On 18/07/16 17:57, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
[Why is this CCed to quite so many places / people?]
Sponsor, reviewer, related package maintainers...
If they're interested, they can follow the bug. They don't all need to
be CCed on every message.
It's because the package is part of the follow-up UX work of
firefox-esr's migration into jessie, targeted at a significant portion
of general stable Debian users. (I'm sorry for the delay) People who
don't use backports have got firefox-esr. Quite a few users seem
confused. This is important for consistency and usability.
Who are these "quite a few users"? Where are they being confused?
With this in stable, we can say to anyone who wants to keep Iceweasel:
"Run this command:
sudo apt-get install xul-ext-iceweasel-branding"
Without bothering about backports.
I understand the idea. I'm just not sure why this package is so special
that they shouldn't "bother with backports".
It is just a rare exception.
Quote (from 815...@bugs.debian.org and
The relevant bits of that bug appear to be confused between the security
archive, proposed-updates and stable-updates, which is unfortunate.
(e.g. there is no firefox or iceweasel package in jessie-updates, nor
has there ever been one.)
(Also there's no such thing as "pockets" in Debian, that's a
Launchpadism. They're called suites, or distributions if you must.)
On 15/06/16 14:06, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
the "bug" is introduce with a stable-release-update, and should be
with another s-p-u
I suspect we disagree as to whether this is a "bug" to begin with.
It was an intentional choice on the part of the maintainers and the
security team, and was announced in the corresponding DSA. Are there
really users who aren't reading DSAs but are happy to install software
as root just because you told them to?
Pkg-mozext-maintainers mailing list