Kurt Roeckx schrieb:
> So I have the impression that if upstream has a stable branch and
> really only do bug fixes with a low chance of regressions that
> this will most likely be accepted.
Yes. For some cases (e.g. postgres and openjdk) the upstream QA made
for the bugfix releases exceeds the p
* Kurt Roeckx:
>> If upstream has long-term stable versions with really limited changes
>> (your linux and postgresql-9.1 examples), we may use them instead of
>> rolling our own releases, based on the assumption that the released
>> version has seen some testing upstream and elsewhere, more than
On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 08:59:31PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Kurt Roeckx:
>
> > I want to start by giving some examples of things that got updated
> > in stable point releases that I know about:
> > - linux was 3.2.41-2 in 7.0, 3.2.51-1 in 7.3, 3.2.53-2 in
> > proposed-updates
> > - icewe
Hi Florian,
On 30.12.2013 20:59, Florian Weimer wrote:
> I don't think we can switch to a new upstream version of Apache httpd.
> But we do backport additional security features from time to time.
> (The enhanced DNSSEC support that came with DSA-2054-1 is an example.)
please read #733564 for s
* Kurt Roeckx:
> I want to start by giving some examples of things that got updated
> in stable point releases that I know about:
> - linux was 3.2.41-2 in 7.0, 3.2.51-1 in 7.3, 3.2.53-2 in
> proposed-updates
> - iceweasel was 10.0.12esr-1 in 7.0, is now 17.0.10esr-1~deb7u1
> - postgresql-9.1 wa
5 matches
Mail list logo
