Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Um, sure, but it _is_ a bug, right? That is, if apt moves to unstable >> in the current state (ABI change, no version change), then it will be >> officially broken. > > It will be broken *only* with respect to packages in experimental.
I don't understand this -- if a package in experimental has an ABI-change from the version in unstable, but no accompanying version change, and that version is moved from experimental is moved to unstable, it will have the _same_ bug, but this time in unstable (and will break packages in unstable etc). Of course the maintainer can fix it before it hits unstable, and that's good, but in order to fix it, he has to know about the problem -- and he may not know. So a bug report against experimental would warn him before he caused havoc in unstable > I think fixing bugs that will never apply at all to > unstable(/testing/stable) is a waste of maintainer time. Well I agree with you -- if that's true. But in this case it's not clear to me that it is (naturally this may be only my poor understanding of the problem). -miles -- `Life is a boundless sea of bitterness' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
