Re: Opening Squeeze backports
On Fri, 10 Dec 2010 20:07:25 +0100, Alexander Wirt wrote:
> 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.
OK, can I help revise the above wording to get it into good enough
shape that it can be used?
> > 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.
It doesn't look like squeeze-backports-sloppy is set up yet
(http://backports.debian.org/debian-backports/dists/). Is it located
somewhere else right now?