On Tue, 2013-04-30 at 10:09 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: > On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 02:03:42AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > There can be no more uploads to unstable for wheezy, so I propose to > > rename sid -> wheezy for each package that currently has a sid branch. > > Okay. > > > Linux 3.9 is now out, so we have a choice between 3.8.10 and 3.9 as the > > first upload for jessie. Maybe we could start with 3.8.10 for unstable > > and 3.9 for experimental? > > I think we should do a 3.8 upload to unstable. Lets see if I got some > time to do some cleanups for 3.9. There is also the armmp introduction to do. > > I would rather not create redundant backports packages, but I think it's > > inevitable that people will want them and squeeze-backports hasn't taken > > a whole lot of work on my part. So I intend to create wheezy-backports > > branches for at least linux, linux-latest and firmware-nonfree. > > Your decision. However, as backports is now the same dak instance as the > main archive, -master should be able to find a way to make this without > the overhead. You mean, simply copying the testing packages into backports if their dependencies are met within stable+backports? That would be nice. Would you like to work on dak for a while? Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Knowledge is power. France is bacon.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part