[website] Update Debian downloads info (Resend)

[Nathan Schulte]

On 07/23/2015 05:23 PM, Kyle Auble wrote:
> Sorry for the goofy formatting. One day Thunderbird doesn't wrap
> anything for me, the next it's cutting my lines short. I'm resending my
> message, hopefully with better formatting this time.

As a fellow Icedove user, I can say that you're not the only one who 
runs up against this.  It's especially hairy for me around re-wrapping 
quoted content; I think I just don't understand how it works.

On 07/23/2015 05:23 PM, Kyle Auble wrote:
> I migrated to Debian Stable within the past year (still think Ubuntu's
> great, just a minimalist that wanted to wander a bit upstream). If I
> understand everything, I think the main reason the wine team still
> bothers with a stable release is for distros like Debian Stable or
> Redhat.

Does Wine treat Stable this way?  In that it receives bugfixes/security 
updates (from Development, mainline) that are applicable to making it 
more stable/secure?  From the release log, it looks like Stable is 
basically dead; the last release was well over a year ago.  I think with 
this scenario, as you hint at with your closing remarks Kyle, if there 
was a single release (no Stable/Development), Debian would just choose 
not to package the newer version and only release the one it believes is 
most stable (perhaps with Debian curated bugfix/security updates from 
upstream).  It seems Stable is to help facilitate this (awesome!), but 
it doesn't actually work that way in practice.

On 07/23/2015 05:23 PM, Kyle Auble wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Rosanne DiMesio
> <dimesio at earthlink.net> wrote:
>> AFAICT, they don't. Debian seems to only build the latest version for
>> testing and unstable.
>
> Rosanne's right about the Debian repo, which means if you want to test
> the freshest wine on Debian Stable, you or someone else has to build it
> for you. Sure enough, that's exactly what I've been trying to figure out
> in my free time (and redo related pages on the wiki in the process). If
> you use chroot or LXC, it's tedious but pretty straight forward, but I'm
> trying to figure out precisely which wine dependencies still aren't
> multi-arch compatible.

Looking at wine-development, it was packaged for Debian Stable, but due 
to the nature of Debian's release policy (which you seem familiar with; 
stable is stable), it doesn't receive but bugfix/security updates, and 
so is thus "stuck" at the version as packaged when Debian Stable was 
released.

This is to be expected, as that's how Debian wants Debian Stable.  If 
you want the bleeding edge on Debian Stable (for any package), you're 
going to have to go outside of the Debian archives to get it if it's 
changed since Debian Stable's release.  This holds for both the wine 
(Wine Stable) and wine-development (Wine Development) packages.

On 07/23/2015 05:23 PM, Kyle Auble wrote:
> I wonder though why the maintainers went with a separate
> wine-development package instead of just pointing the wine package in
> testing & unstable to the development release, then offering that to
> stable through Backports.

We can always loop them in and ask: pkg-wine-party at lists.alioth.debian.org

It seems like the packaging in Debian of both Wine Stable and Wine 
Development as different "packages" in their own right was the wrong choice.

--
Nate