Re: Unsupported Debian [was: Re: [New maintainer] Working for De
Alex Shnitman wrote:
> No, please don't do that. This will almost make official and endorsed
> the existence of rogue Debian packages from outside the project.
Rogue debian archives like "deb http://security.debian.org/ stable updates",
Debian's very own security updates archive?
Or perhaps you're referring to the dasterdly work of people like Stephen
Crowley, Paul Seelig, Branden Robinson, and Stephane Bortzmeyer, developers
all, who have the gall to maintain non-official archives?
No, I get it! You're talking about those evil Debian-JP people who have two
complete archives on the list. That's it! Or hm, perhaps you were actually
referring to the Debian GMOME Team? It's a Red Hat plot!
Get over it. developer-run apt archives are the majority of the page.
Perhaps you should realize that if these items arn't in Debian proper, it's
because the developers who set them up have good reasons for that?
> If you're not a developer and create packages, add them to Stephane's
> list. But don't make it look like it's endorsed by the project.
"Official packets came from Debian developers and are distributed from
Debian official sites and CD-ROMs. Unsupported packages came from NOBODY. No
PGP signature, no authentification, no support, no address in @debian.org,
no Bug Tracking System."
Have you even looked at the page?
see shy jo