Re: Security support for tier-2
Matthias Urlichs <firstname.lastname@example.org> schrieb:
> Hi, Sven Luther wrote:
>> Because of , because they said they will drop security on tier-2 arches and
>> that porters should be left to fend by themselves, did they not ?
> Nothing's going to prevent porters from adding stable-security (or
> whatever) to their autobuilders, so even if "they" drop support, the
> only work porters would have to do WRT each security-bugfixed package
> would be "sign the .changes file".
> In other words, I don't see a problem here.
There is one problem: These porters would need a debian.org machine to
host their archive, and this puts again some workload on the ftpmasters
and system admins. From the Vancouver proposal it seemed to me that
it was not planned to provide such ressources.
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich