On 2018, ഡിസംബർ 18 7:14:14 PM IST, Rhonda D'Vine <rho...@deb.at> wrote:
> And yes, I'm with Alexander, the volatile maintenance can't be dumped
>on the backports team. It's a different workflow anyway.
My proposal for backports is to have only the dependencies of packages in
volatile that fall in the current definition of backports kept there, ie,
1. They are already in testing and
2. will be part of next stable.
And use volatile only for packages that cannot fit this criteria. I'd be happy
to join the backports team to help with the extra load. I hope others will join
too.
But if that is not possible, volatile as a separate archive is also fine. It is
just that many packages will have to be in both archives and that is a lot of
extra work, which I think can be avoided.
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
