Hi Disclaimer: I'm not a BPO ftpmaster, but a bpo uploader and DD. Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> writes: > Hi there! > > Currently, I maintain OpenStack in Sid, and maintain a private > repository for the Wheezy backports. Though I don't like doing this, I > think OpenStack should be in official Debian repositories only. And > mostly, everyone uses Wheezy for deployments... > > Therefore, I'm considering uploading all of OpenStack and all of the > needed python dependencies directly within Debian official backports. > Though the list of package is quite huge. I'm talking here about nearly > 180 packages. Most of them are in Python. I would greatly appreciate this. I don't like the fact that I currently have to add an external repository for my OpenStack deployment. Also with the requirement that packages must enter testing first I would hope for some more testing of the packages so I don't get hit by easy bugs as has happened in the past. > > What is the view of the BPO FTP masters? Do you think that's a good > plan? If not, why? > > If you need the list of packages, you can browse from there: > http://archive.gplhost.com/debian/pool/havana-backports/main/ (97 > .dsc) You should coordinate with the relevant maintainers of these packages. I don't think that just uploading a package to bpo which is maintained by someone else is acceptable. But as most of these are probably maintained by the python modules team, I don't expect this to be a problem in practice if the team agrees that you can provide backports. > http://archive.gplhost.com/debian/pool/havana/main/ (83 .dsc) > > (the first one is direct backports maintained by others, the 2nd one is > made of packages that are maintained directly by the OpenStack team > (which nowadays means mainly me). Note that some of the packages in the > first repo are also maintained (also) by me though the Python module > team when possible. > > Another issue is that it's been hard to have all packages to migrate > from Sid to testing, so in the future, I might also have such difficulty > (even though right now, it's in good shape). As written above I would actually consider this a bonus over the current situation as there is mostly a reason (RC bug) that these packages don't enter testing. I guess that transitions shouldn't be a big problem for python modules. I would be willing to help with the backporting effort as time permits. Gaudenz > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-backports-request@lists.debian.org > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org > Archive: [🔎] 5317461F.8060302@debian.org">https://lists.debian.org/[🔎] 5317461F.8060302@debian.org > > -- Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better. ~ Samuel Beckett ~
Attachment:
pgpXWLs_Rr4MH.pgp
Description: PGP signature