Re: Opening Squeeze backports
Michael Gilbert schrieb am Friday, den 10. December 2010:
> On Fri, 10 Dec 2010 19:28:18 +0100, Sven Hoexter wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 07:04:53PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> >
> > > I think it would be a good idea to explain _why_ there is not yet a
> > > squeeze backports repository other than "we don't want to do this
> > > right now".
> >
> > Not that I'm official in any way but I thought that's obvious from the
> > criteria for lenny-backports (and all prior backport suits).
>
> I think the problem is that this fact isn't stated very clearly right
> now, so new/average users tend to not realize that this is the case.
> The backports front page does in effect say this, but it is rather
> wordy, unclear, and perhaps a bit ambiguous. An additional statement
> such as the following on the front page would help quite a bit:
>
> Currently supported backport archives:
> lenny-backports - An archive of packages backported from the current
> testing distribution (squeeze) to the current stable distribution
> (lenny) with guaranteed upgradability to squeeze.
> squeeze-backports-sloppy - An archive of packages backported from
> various locations to the current testing distribution (squeeze)
> with no guarantee of upgradability to any other newer release.
Yeah, as soon as I have a good wording for this statement I'll (or Rhonda)
will add this.
> Actually, would it be possible to open sloppy at this point? That may
> address the need stated in the original post in this thread.
Sloppy is open, but as squeeze is not released yet we handwaive every package
by hand. So if you want to upload something, tell us.
Reply to: