On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 02:18:54PM +0200, Ulrike Uhlig wrote: > It would be useful to know with which statements or assumptions you do > not agree with and why - so that the discussion may become more > productive & helpful. "cannot be maintained in stable". I think this can at least be tried. And IMO its better to have tbl in stable until the 5th or 7th pointrelease and then have it removed (if it has to be done), than not having tbl at all, never.
> > anyway, i just want to point out that 'maintaining tbl in stretch via
> > stretch-backports' doesnt work because tbl is not in buster and thus, if
> > this bug gets retitled to 'tbl should not be part of bullseye',
> > maintaining tbl in buster via bullseye-backports will also not work.
> Do you have any suggestion on how to handle this?
maintain tbl in stable.
--
tschau,
Holger
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C
Our civilization is being sacrificed for the opportunity of a very small number
of people to continue making enormous amounts of money... It is the sufferings
of the many which pay for the luxuries of the few... You say you love your
children above all else, and yet you are stealing their future in front of
their very eyes...
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
