Bug#484873: packages.qa.debian.org: should it still list oldstable?
On Sat, 07 Jun 2008, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 12:20:04PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > On Sat, 07 Jun 2008, Christian Perrier wrote:
> > > As of now, oldstable is no longer supported (security-wise).
> > > I wonder whether it should still be listed on p.q.d.o pages in such
> > > situations, which might be misleading to out users.
> > The PTS is mostly static and it's painful to make stuff appear and
> > disappear based on a criteria that can't be checked programmatically.
> If you added a toggle for "is oldstable supported?", then surely that would
> then be a programmatic check...?
The thing is that I don't want to have to keep that information
synchronized myself. I already have to manually update the current policy
version in the XSL stylesheet, I'd rather not add other similar
duplicate information that we have to keep in sync.
> > So my vote goes to keep it. If you solve the problem of detecting if
> > oldstable is supported or not, we can eventually put it in another color
> > or put a title attribute over it to mark it's no more supported.
> I think it's fair to leave oldstable listed on p.q.d.o until such time as
> oldstable is dropped from the archive. I guess mirror disk space is not a
> pressing issue right now, since this hasn't happened yet.
Right, when it disappear I think the download script starts complaining
Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch :