On Fri, 2024-09-20 at 18:53 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 04:53:09PM +0200, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Thu, 2024-06-13 at 20:48 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
[...]
> > > > ## Proposal
> > > >
> > > > Stop merging back changes, but create version distinct branches.
> > > > Something like that:
> > > master: uploaded to experimental
> > Call this debian/latest so we follow DEP-14 as far as possible.
>
> I'm a bit reluctant on the latest, but well. The rest of the world
> agreed on main.
I know, but this is the Debian way.
> > > -> debian/release/6.6: uploaded to unstable and stable releases
> > > -> debian/security/6.6.1+1: extra security releases
> > I would prefer to use suite names in these branch names, to make
> > itclearer what the branches correspond to. So those would be:
> > - debian/6.6/unstable
>
> How do you think the transition to stable will happen? Just leave it
> this way?
>
> I would prefer to directly use the release name, aka
> "debian/6.6/trixie", because this is what the package is destined for.
I think that's also OK.
> That it is uploaded to unstable (or to (testing-)proposed-updates) is
> part of the technical implementation, but it does not change our policy
> for it (same version range etc, or did I miss some differences?).
>
> > - debian/6.6/bookworm-backports
> > - debian/6.6.1+1/booxie-security [*]
> > (swapping the release and suite so that they don't actually conflict
> > with DEP-14 branch names).
>
> Okay.
>
> We can then also use "debian/6.6/experimental" or "debian/6.6/latest",
> if necessary.
When would we need those? Are you thinking about how we would switch
upstream version in experimental during a freeze?
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Man invented language to satisfy his deep need to complain.
- Lily Tomlin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part