On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 2:00 PM, Luke L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 7/7/08, Evan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I would propose a compromise between the current LTS pattern and the > > proposed bug-fix only pattern: maintain the current upstream merge, but > add > > no new packages. That way newer software is still in the repositories > (and > > thus supported upstream for the longest time possible), but the more > > intrepid changes (ex: pulseaudio) are dropped. Users get a system that is > > still up-to-date, and developers get much more time to fix bugs. > > > > Decisions would have to be made on an individual basis for packages that > are > > officially discontinued upstream in favour of newer implementations. > > This sounds like my second suggestion, I think we are on the same page > here. LTS needs more attention to stability than is giving to STS. >
I'm not sure we're on the same page. Your second suggestion still drops the upstream merge. I think that the merge is necessary, but that we shouldn't add new packages like pulse-audio for an LTS.
-- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
