Re: updating roundcube backports to 1.2.x?
On 05/16/2017 12:58 PM, Guilhem Moulin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 16 May 2017 at 07:01:45 +0200, Rhonda D'Vine wrote:
>> * Rhonda D'Vine <rhonda@deb.at> [2017-05-03 10:39:35 CEST]:
>>> * Guilhem Moulin <guilhem@guilhem.org> [2017-04-11 18:07:09 CEST]:
>>>> When I last checked this last autumn, backporting all dependencies was
>>>> too much work for us.
>>>
>>> If it is considered too much work then that might be a good sign for
>>> the future to rather avoid backporting it at all in the first place ...
>>>
>>> I'm a bit uncertain on what to suggest to move forward here to get
>>> things straightened out again.
>>
>> May I get a response to how the people who feel roundcube should stay
>> in backports see the issue? Actually a silence doesn't move us forward
>> here, and I consider removing roundcube from backports because it feels
>> unmaintained if there is unwillingness to update it to the version from
>> testing.
>
> It's probably not a good excuse, but FWIW when I joined the team I
> mostly offered to maintain the bpo to compensate for the missing
> packages in Jessie. Of course I'd prefer to follow upstream's fast
> development pace, but I suppose I underestimated the amount of work
> required (esp. now at the end of the release cycle) to backport all
> dependencies maintained by the PHP team.
I just saw this thread (was a bit behind on reading my Debian
mailing lists recently) and I am actually using Jessie + Roundcube
from backports, so may I offer my help in backporting all of the
dependencies of Roundcube instead of dropping Roundcube? (Especially
since Stretch is nearly stable now, they won't change, and the
maintenance of these backports in Jessie won't be as bad once they
are done initially.) I would need a sponsor (I'm a DM, not a DD),
but I do have some experience in backporting things, and I do have
quite a bit of experience with PHP.
Regards,
Christian
Reply to: