Eric Dorland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> * spamassassin >> * snort >> >> could be considered perishable because their effectiveness is reduced over >> time. Such classed packages should be allowed to be updated in stable, I >> feel. Of course, it could be argued that any package is perishable, and thus >> this whole thing becomes a moot point... > > We always have to be careful with things like that, since stable is > *stable*... it should not really change, except to address critical > issues. Not that I disagree with your proposal. I think that some > value in updating these packages, and for packages such as > spamassassin and snort the case could be made that updating them would > be security updates, particularly in the case of snort. > > Also those two packages really contain rule sets that could be > packaged separately and updated, while leaving the core code > unchanged. That would probably be the least surprising thing, and the > least likely to cause bugs, but would still be a lot of work and > testing. > Perhaps the rule-sets could be handled outside of the debian package system, like clamav does (clamav runs a daemon that fetches new rulesets as they become availle on the Net).
Andy -- Andreas Rottmann | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://yi.org/rotty | GnuPG Key: http://yi.org/rotty/gpg.asc Fingerprint | DFB4 4EB4 78A4 5EEE 6219 F228 F92F CFC5 01FD 5B62 Packages should build-depend on what they should build-depend.
