On Tue, 18 Dec 2018, Pirate Praveen wrote: > [adding -devel to cc] > > On 12/3/18 8:11 PM, Dominik George wrote: > >> well, Debian is using gitlab!!! so this sentence has no sense. The > >> problem here > >> is that is a complex software that depends of a lot of pieces and it's > >> not > >> easy/possible to fit the definition. So, maybe we should create another > >> category > >> of software. > > > > Yes, and that Debian officially uses GitLab, from a foreign source, without being able to support it in Debian, does make me feel ashamed for the project. > > > >> maybe creating another kind of repo. debian-contributuions > >> debian-blabla, whatever. > >> > > > > We had volatile, which, redefined properly, could help. I am trying to draft such a definition. > > Did you get a chance to work on it? > > I think it has to be an extension of backports with dependencies that > fall within the backports criteria being maintained in backports and > only packages that cannot be in backports maintained in volatile. > > Original definition of volatile from https://www.debian.org/volatile/: > "Some packages aim at fast moving targets, such as spam filtering and > virus scanning, and even when using updated data patterns, they do not > really work for the full time of a stable release. The main goal of > volatile is allowing system administrators to update their systems in a > nice, consistent way, without getting the drawbacks of using unstable, > even without getting the drawbacks for the selected packages. So > debian-volatile will only contain changes to stable programs that are > necessary to keep them functional." > > Proposed definition: > "Some packages aim at fast moving targets, such as complex web based > software with very small release cycles and new dependencies, they do > not receive security support or bug fixes for the full time of a stable > release. This means backporting targeted fixes are impossible. The main > goal of volatile is allowing system administrators to update their > systems in a nice, consistent way, without getting the drawbacks of > using unstable, even without getting the drawbacks for the selected > packages. New dependencies introduced can be maintained in backports > repository. So debian-volatile will be an extension of debian-backports, > with dependencies that fall within the criteria maintained in > debian-backports." I don't think that -backports is the right suite. It should be something new, with a new team. Alex
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature