Re: Origin / Suite in Debian Backports Release file

Hello,

Thanks Sven and Axe for your replies.

As I told you in my previous message the schema I was proposing is followed in the whole set of jessie repositories (jessie, jessie-updates and jessie-proposed-updates). Backports it is the only one that is different. My suggestion is based mainly on cleanliness and simplification and using the same guidelines for all repositories.

Sven Hoexter wrote:
> While it's testing-backports for now it will be stable-backports,
> oldstable-backports and stale-backports during the years. Would that still
> be helpful for your usecase?

It will, since it's what happens with other repositories. Personally, I prefer to point to the codename (squeeze, jessie, etc.) to control the moment of the upgrades.

Axel Beckert wrote:
> But the Label field should IMHO still contain the word "backports" to
> make clear that these are backports and the quality assurance is not
> the same as for a Debian Stable release.

It could be argued that backports is now fully integrated in the Debian project and that by not being activated by default is how the Debian project offers it as a complementary option. See that proposed-updates it's "something" like that and does not use use Label to remark an information that is already given in both Suite and Codename.

Cheers,

Manuel