[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Opening Squeeze backports

Marc Haber schrieb am Saturday, den 18. December 2010:

> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 07:28:18PM +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).
> > 
> > So packages which get backported should in general be part of the next
> > release. That is only very likely the case when they manage to migrate
> > to testing. So how would you measure that for a squeeze backports repository
> > starting before a wheezy testing? Things like 'I got through new with it and
> > it's in experimental now' is not something I would consider to be sane in that
> > case.
> Thomas asked for an _empty_ Repository so that his systems which have
> migrated from lenny+backports to squeeze don't need to be touched
> again when squeeze+backports becomes feasible.
"The thing is,
is there the possibility to upload backports for Squeeze already?"

That was the question. 

I don't see the request for an empty repo.


Reply to: