daniel.holbach at ubuntu.com
Fri Jun 29 07:49:52 BST 2007
Am Donnerstag, den 28.06.2007, 18:46 +0200 schrieb Marek Slama:
> Tom Marble wrote:
> > The reason an SRU may still make sense here is that currently the
> > version in feisty (0.59):
> > http://packages.ubuntu.com/cgi-bin/search_packages.pl?searchon=names&subword=1&version=feisty&release=all&keywords=netbeans&sourceid=mozilla-search
> > Is the one which requires the user to manually download the NetBeans
> > tarball first. This significantly diminishes the end user experience
> > of installation.
> No strong opinion on this so far.
> I will sum differences between 5.5-0.59 (currently in Feisty) and
> current 5.5.1-2 in gutsy:
> 1. License is updated so that package can be installed directly without
> manual step. It is main
> reason why we want to get this update back to Feisty.
> 2. We updated upstream from NetBeans 5.5 to NetBeans 5.5.1.
> 3. Minor fix - patch for netbeans.conf to point to Sun JDK.
> We would like to get all 3 changes to Feisty. Daniel please let us now
> if we should go through SRU or Backport process.
the thing is that the diff between the versions in the archive (35M vs
121M) is huge. You can't expect somebody to eyeball all that.
It's not my decision in the end, but the one of the archive admins. I
see your point that it'd be nicer for end users to get the right thing
in the first place and I'm absolutely not arguing against that. I just
guess that a backport might be the more realistic option.
If you want to have a chat with archive admins, here's the list of them:
https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-archive/+members - also
ubuntu-archive at lists.ubuntu.com
Have a nice day,
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-motu/attachments/20070629/bcdd8407/attachment.pgp
More information about the Ubuntu-motu