Re: third-party packages adding apt sources
Paul Tagliamonte writes ("Re: third-party packages adding apt sources"):
> [cc'ing devel, since this is a rant that involves technical topics, and
> god knows I only go on so many rants a year these days]
I think you may have only BCC'd -devel, or something.
> > Sometimes there is good reason their
> > package doesn't belong in Debian but sometimes it is more about inertia
> > in Debian or the upstream isn't aware about backports and thinks their
> > package will be stuck at a particular version forever
>
> Frankly, I have a hell of a lot of sympathy for this.
I just wanted to say that while my own messages have been addressing a
rather different set of third-party repos, I don't really disagree
with the picture you paint.
> We have zero procedure in place for the following:
And I definitely agree with this complaint.
> Go to any mature project, they have a way to bypas the archive, and get
> the latest stable from upstream. This is a huge failure. Upstreams
> aren't becoming DDs and updating packages, dispite the fact they can
> package and maintain things.
>
> Hell, teams packaging Mozilla-soft and PostgreSQL are DDs maintaining
> *external archives* because it's easier.
Yes.
Ian.
Reply to: