Re: Changes to experimental, proposed-updates and orphaned distributions
Ian Jackson <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> James Troup writes ("Changes to experimental, proposed-updates and orphaned distributions"):
> > (1) Experimental is dead, long live experimental.
> > As mentioned in an earlier email, I've cleaned a lot of the cruft out
> > of experimental. What remains has been migrated to the pool and the
> > old (horrible) setup of project/experimental has been replaced with a
> > proper per-component+per-architecture setup like all the other real
> > distributions. Anyone using experimental will have to update their
> > apt/dpkg-ftp/whatever configuration file to cope. (No, I'm not going
> > to give an example, as I have no desire to encourage careless use of
> > experimental.)
> project/experimental used to be used both for packages that ought
> not according to their uploader be generally installed, and for other
> kinds of experimental files that maintainers want to make available.
> For example, it could be used for collections of source code that are
> not yet made into proper packages, or handmade binaries or archives or
> what have you.
> Can we please have somewhere to put things like that ?
Err, well a) no one's used it like that in the last 4-5 years and b)
the changes I've made don't affect your ability to use it like that.
All I've done is made it a proper suite which makes it massively
easier to handle for me, and changes how dpkg-ftp/apt/whatever see it.
It doesn't change what can be uploaded there etc.
> If there's a problem with it filling full of cruft just make things
> expire after 12 months.
That's another option that I'm more than happy to put in place if
people don't object.