Hi Let me try to make it a bit clearer and please note that I am up for having everything into debian, I just do not think that it will work (out of experience). > > Not a big problem for me, as I tend to do my own image (and repository) > > if needed :) > > So this would probably be the answer, but I fail to see a > contradiction to a general maintainance of packages inside > Debian. Please read the ArchivePolicy[0] to see how our repository works. There is the case, where we want to test a package in a -test repository and maybe never pushing it into debian, if it does not fulfill its needs. We also want to have -test and more stable daily build images to test with. In the case for debian, we could of course use unstable and testing, but then we want to decide, when a package is ready for testing migration, which is totally independent from debian's migration way (I doubt that we get the rights to influence our packages and their testing migration). We always want to provide a lenny (or the equivalent) environment, not an unstable environment. We want to be able to change package versions for stable (e.g. our r1 will probably include a new upstream version of lwat for example). We want our people to be able to upload and we need a mirror push soonish and need it on administrator to be able to build the new images asap. Sometimes backports might be needed. Sometimes we need to do some NMUs for packages to get some fixes in sooner (at the beginning of the relase cycle this often includes the d-i or some NMUs of packages, which did not yet reach testing). I am pretty sure that I forgot a lot of usecases, so this list is not complete. Cheers Steffen [0]: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/ArchivePolicy
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.