On 20/07/12 02:05, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
> On 19 July 2012 10:31, Tom Eastep <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Recent questions from the Debian release team about the current practice
>> have prompted me to revisit the issue. As I see it, there are three
>> possible approaches:
>>
>> 1)  Continue to release all packages.
>>
>> 2)  Continue to release all packages and indicate which of them
>>     actually changed. That would allow individual packagers to release
>>     some or all of them.
>>
> With my Fedora packager hat on, I'd prefer one of the above.

I agree with Jonathan.  With my non-packager, mostly-non-developer hat
on, i think that keeping the versions lock-stepped follows the principle
of least surprise for Shorewall's users.  It might save hours of effort
for developers & packagers by not having them lock-stepped, but it will
save hundreds of hours of confusion and dozens of questions on the
mailing list if we keep it the way it is.

Paul

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and 
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions 
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware 
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Shorewall-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-devel

Reply via email to