Re: Creating a new named official debian repository for OpenStack backports (Uploading all of OpenStack to backports)
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 8:32 AM, Gaudenz Steinlin <gaudenz@debian.org> wrote:
> Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> writes:
>
>> On 10/03/14 at 22:27 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>>> On 03/09/2014 12:51 AM, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>>> > One other thing comes to mind: for packages that are slightly more
>>> > volatile than what the backports maintainers expect, or large
>>> > collections of packages like OpenStack, is it worthwhile having some
>>> > alternative to wheezy-backports? E.g. call it wheezy-backports-plus and
>>> > just distribute things from unstable or jessie compiled automatically on
>>> > a wheezy box?
>>>
>>> Actually, now that you make me think about it, I know that FTP masters
>>> have already implemented creating "any" new named repository. So I'm
>>> adding them in the loop to ask for it.
>>>
>>> So, dear FTP masters, would it be possible for you to create some new
>>> repositories for OpenStack? I would need:
>>> - wheezy-havana
>>> - wheezy-icehouse
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm very much in favor of providing up-to-date OpenStack packages to
>> users of wheezy. The fact that the official OpenStack documentation for
>> Debian points to an unofficial repository is quite sad.
>>
>> However, I'm not sure I understand what problems would be solved by
>> using wheezy-havana, wheezy-icehouse, etc. instead of just plainly
>> wheezy-backports?
>
> I agree with Lucas here. Unless the backports ftpmasters have specific
> concerns (they did not comment until now). I would prefer to have this
> in debian-backports instead of it's own repository.
>
> The only "problem" that could be solved is to lift the requirement that
> packages have to enter testing before going into backports. But to me
> this is actually a feature lacking form the current unofficial
> repository.
I can't speak for the backports ftpmasters, but given that they
refused to accept php5 into backports due to it (well, the latest
upstream 5.4.x branch) not being in testing, I doubt they'll make an
exception for openstack as well. I certainly can't fault them; if you
make an exception for php/openstack/whatever, other maintainers will
certainly start asking for exemptions as well.
Until PPAMAIN becomes reality, the best solution is probably the
status quo, i.e. host your repository somewhere else on non-Debian
infrastracture. You can still take advantage of the debian.net
namespace though, e.g. openstack.debian.net.
Regards,
Vincent
Reply to: