Re: [Pkg-owncloud-maintainers] Would a backport be useful?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi there,
Am 18.09.13 23:52, schrieb Sandro Knauß:
>> As one man show (without deeper knowledge of the owncloud
>> packaging), it is not possible to maintain all those packages
>> proper in an official Debian repository for me. I don't like the
>> idea, that I'm not able to provide recent packages (keep in mind
>> the build-deps) and users sitting on buggy/unsecure software.
>> This is the main reason just providing them in my own
>> repository.
>
> I think the only packages that get additional into build deps are
> js and php libs, because the are used as 3rd-party modules and they
> should not be hard to backport. We would support you with our
> knowledge to keep the backport packages well formed. Feel welcome
> to ask for details!
I've prepared backported (just rebuild still) packages of owncloud[1]
for wheezy. I even backported all (build-)dependencies. Anyways .. I
don't feel I have time to commit me to maintain them official on
wheezy-backports.
If anybody is interested in those packages, all needed
(source-)packages can be found in my own package pool[2] in the
distribution 'wheezy-backorts'.
I would appreciate to see owncloud in the backports pool.
Thanks and with kind regards, Jan.
[1] http://packages.qa.debian.org/owncloud
[2] http://ftp.cyconet.org/debian/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
iEYEARECAAYFAlJGtskACgkQ9u6Dud+QFySGRgCfTkapatFllsCDS+PwARtL+vxa
t24An2PsE45mJNrk2Yb+nncbnifQLjAc
=UDHJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: