On Mon, 15 Dec 2008, Rene Engelhard wrote: > Hi, > > Santiago Vila wrote: > > BTW: Should I worry about Bug#508772? This is the very first time in > > 10 years that someone seems unconvenienced by seeing a version number > > like 5.0 in unstable for a few weeks. Are there really packages which > > break because of this? If not, I feel that the BTS is being abused. > > If it wouldn't break stuff I wouldn't have filed this as a "important" bug > (but as minor) > > openoffice.org 3.x is already prepared for lenny backports and does that > based on checking lsb_releases output.
Ok, some questions: * Why don't you worry about lenny backports after lenny is stable? I thought it was a policy for *-backports that packages reach testing first, which is not obviouslty the case. * Is lsb_release really required for that? Is not there any other way to achieve the same result? * What about release in lsb_*release*? One could argue that trying to apply release properties to things which are not released is not the way to go. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
