jhcha54008 <jhcha54008@free.fr> (2017-12-30): > clone 879145 -1 > retitle -1 backports support > thanks > > Thank you for your answer. I can understand that you prioritize > backports support. Perhaps we should open a different bug report > to keep track of the discussion about backports support ? > > debian-ports supports seems comparatively easier : there is no > udeb package overlap between the two suites 'unstable' and 'unreleased', > as far as I can see. Some packages in 'unreleased' are arch-specific > to a non released architecture - and so not in 'unstable'. And the > other packages didn't make their way to 'unstable' because they FTBFS - > modified versions were uploded to 'unreleased'. Provided your input, it looks like adding support for unreleased would be trivial once we have backports support. As I said in my earlier mail, let's see if we can make that happen during January. Pokes welcome if you don't see anything move by the end of that month. Season's greetings to you too! Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois (kibi@debian.org) <https://debamax.com/> D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature