Re: New Backports Suite created
On Tue, 5 Oct 2010 08:49:03 +0200, Gerfried Fuchs <email@example.com> wrote:
> * Michael Gilbert <firstname.lastname@example.org> [2010-10-04 22:56:49
>> On Mon, 4 Oct 2010 22:32:28 +0200, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
>> > Actually, no, because that would give the impression that actually
>> > backports from unstable are wanted in it, which is only the
>> > especially for now during the freeze of squeeze. After squeeze is
>> > released the same rules like for squeeze-backports will apply, the
>> > package has to be in testing (which will be wheezy by then).
>> If they're the same thing at that point, then why have both?
> Because one is backports to lenny, and one is backports to squeeze?
> I really hope you can understand the difference?
But, it is called *lenny*-backports-sloppy. This suggests that this is
also backports to lenny. If I understood your announcement correctly than
lenny-backports are backports from squeeze and lenny-backports-sloppy are
backports from squeeze+x.