On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 23:23:05 +0200 Alexander Wirt <formorer@formorer.de> wrote: > On Fri, 08 Jun 2018, Holger Levsen wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 11:09:52PM +0200, Alexander Wirt wrote: > > > In the last days I had the idea to introduce a new suite names > > > -lts, i.e. jessie-backports-lts. That suite starts with the > > > handover of a release to the lts team. > > > > do you envision to start this suite empty? or would you import > > existing jessie-backports to it? > Absolutly empty, otherwise the commitment of the uploader would be > missing. Thanks, that clears the worry from my mind about the original request. There's no way I would want my jessie-backports packages going automatically into jessie-backports-lts - we've been trying to get our backports users off jessie already. LTS is less interesting from my side, I try not to add the burden of supporting backports which have dependencies which are already outside upstream security support, like Django. It sounds like a good idea, as long as there are people who need it. If this is done, it would likely need to be repeated for future releases too. -- Neil Williams home@codehelp.co.uk
Attachment:
pgpdps2l65WYm.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature