On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 3:35 AM, Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > > while for virtualbox Arch Linux does follow upstream, even while there > is a critical known USB issue, for Claws Mail, where AFAIK isn't a > critical issue, it doesn't follow upstream. > I will go out on a limb here and say if it is flagged out-of-date that implies it is meant to be updated. Or the maintainer would simply re-mark it as up to date. I am sure there could be all kinds of reasons why any specific package could be out of date for a while, without implying that other packages should be left in the same unfortunate condition to match. ;) I try to understand this, but I can't understand it. Is there latitude > for the maintainers to decide what is an official release from upstream > and what isn't? > Obviously the maintainer hasn't gotten around to updating it yet, which is why the package was left with a big question mark over its head for a month. (For a given value of question mark, anyway.) If the maintainer went "nanana I think it's up to date anyway", then maybe that would indicate it isn't following upstream, and we should all start panicking.
