Re: Opening Squeeze backports

[Michael Gilbert <michael.s.gilbert@gmail.com>]

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.

Actually, would it be possible to open sloppy at this point?  That may
address the need stated in the original post in this thread.

Mike