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

Re: "Automatic" backports



On Fri, 30 Sep 2011 06:56:41 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net> wrote:
> On 29/09/11 at 09:17 -0400, micah anderson wrote:
> > On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 13:35:20 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net> wrote:
> > > On 29/09/11 at 09:45 +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > I'm one of those people believing that packages that do grant a backport
> > > > shouldn't require modification to do so. As such, all the packages I
> > > > backport have no modifications in their source compared to the version
> > > > in testing/unstable, besides the obvious debian/changelog change.
> > > > 
> > > > This means such packages could just automatically flow into backports. I
> > > > must say it would make my life easier if it were the case ; I happen
> > > > to regularly forget to push security updates to lenny-backports.
> > > > 
> > > > What do the backports people think about that?
> > > 
> > > I like the idea a lot. There are many packages that would just work when
> > > automatically backported, but we don't have the manpower to backport
> > > them all.
> > > 
> > > Maybe this could be started as an unofficial service (on debian.net)?
> > 
> > Automated backporting was discussed in some detail at Debconf in
> > Spain.
> 
> Do you have a more precise pointer to that discussion? Google wasn't
> helpful, but maybe I'm just using the wrong keywords.

I don't, I tried to find it, but I am on a slow connection and I could
not download the videos to find the exact one. It may not have been
recorded, but I seem to recall that it was part of a FTP master talk in
the Q&A session. 


micah

Attachment: pgp8rx97IPCay.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: