We still need to fix our packaging schema in which people are forced to jump into .0 releases because of our repository naming schema. I propose we step forward and create "3.18", "3.20" and so on, instead of just "stable", "oldstable", etc. This way no one will be forced to jump into another major release. "stable" "oldstable" and "testing" might still be usable as they are now, nothing prevents a .deb package from populating more than one slot. Or even of symbolic links... Some of you expressed your concerns about "people indefinitely using obsolete/insecure releases". I propose that once a release goes "unmaintained" [1] a "last" release/package adding a red-notorious warning message on the intranet footer is pushed stating that the release is no longer maintained and provinding a link for upgrade instructions. I hope we can fix this once and for all soon. [1] unmaintained = it has no release maintainer on some "Roles for XX" vote. -- Tomás Cohen Arazi Prosecretaría de Informática Universidad Nacional de Córdoba ✆ +54 351 5353750 ext 13168 GPG: B76C 6E7C 2D80 551A C765 E225 0A27 2EA1 B2F3 C15F