On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 02:35:19PM +0100, Dominik George wrote: > >volatile is a very bad name for this because we've used it already for > >something else. > Well, I consider it more or less the same basic idea. The old and new ideas > have more in common than not, with the only difference being that previously, > volatile packages also had versions in stable. that *you* understand this naming was out of the question and is besides my point.
(and this is absolutly not ment in any hostile way, just stating a fact.)
--
cheers,
Holger
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
