On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 17:02:34 +0200 Joachim Breitner <email@example.com> wrote: > Hi Sven, > > Am Donnerstag, den 09.07.2015, 14:52 +0200 schrieb Sven Bartscher: > > As you might have noticed, I just pushed a new commit to the > > package-plan that contained a new file "lts-diff.hs". > > > > (Once compiled) it looks at packages.txt and lts.config and gives us > > three lists of packages: > > > > - Packages that are in the LTS but not in Debian > > - Packages that have a different versions in Debian and the LTS > > - Packages that are in Debian but not the LTS > > nice! More tooling is good. > > > Packages that are in Debian but not the LTS aren't of that much > > interest either, because those have to be marked as a key package (or be > > a dependency of a key package) and if not the package plan will yell. > > I would say that is a interesting list. Ideally, all our packages are > in LTS, so these are packages where we could try to convince upstream > to join Stackage. That's a good point. I didn't see that before. > > So the interesting thing is the list of packages that are in the LTS > > but not in Debian. This way we have a list of packages we might want to > > add to Debian. > > I’m not sure if that is really useful. I don’t think we have too few > packages in Debian – if anything, we have too many. So I do not see any > value in just adding „all of Stackage“. Or what is your intention here? I guess you have a good point there. I'm glad one of the other lists might turn out to be useful.
Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP