On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 08:59:24PM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote: > * dann frazier ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [071221 18:07]: > > If using p-u gives us no reasonable way to back out, then its not the > > right answer. > > Actually, if we do something that doesn't give us a reasonable way to > back out, I think we have missed our goals from etch+.5 - IIRC we wanted > the new kernel set to be an addition. That means to me that we need to > be able to take it away (plus perhaps a few additional helpers), and the > rest of the system is unchanged. Or is there a flaw in these thoughts?
That's the way I see it as well - these should be all new packages or modifications to existing packages that we consider safe for etch. The question I have is whether or not we can use proposed-updates to stage etch 1/2, but still have the ability to do point releases that omit the new etch 1/2 packages. I'm not really sure what magic happens between p-u and a point release, so I don't know if this is feasible. -- dann frazier -- To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
