[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: sarge release notes - mentioning apt-get.org and backports.org

On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 08:27:02PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> Personally however, I see an important distinction between debian-volatile 
> and the other two sites.
> Debian-volatile will be very restrictive and aims to guarantee 
> compatibility with upgrades to new releases of Debian. It will also be 
> fully maintained within the current release.
> apt-get.org and (possibly to a lesser degree) backports.org both are 
> largely uncontrolled with a real risk of at least file conflicts 
> occurring on a dist-upgrade to a next release. There is no guarantee, 
> especially as a new release gets closer, that packages on both sites will 
> still be maintained and upgrade paths from them to the next release 
> tested.

Will volatile really be taken into account for upgrades sarge->etch? As
far as I can see, both volatile.debian.net and backports.org are
maintained by Debian developers, for both all Debian developers have
upload access, and both are unofficial services maintained outside of
the .debian.org infrastructure.

backports.org has proven its usefulness, but hasn't made any steps yet
to a bit more official status, volatile is still quite young, it's
unclear how it will work out, and similarly isn't yet in any way
official. Personally I doubt for both whether they will make it into
something official at all, because of some inherent issues with them in
terms of support. The future will tell, I simply think it's a bit
premature to assume that volatile *does* have a guarantee of upgrade
path to etch -- people may do their best just as they may do so for
upgrade paths from backports.org packages, but that doesn't guarantee


Jeroen van Wolffelaar
Jeroen@wolffelaar.nl (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357)

Reply to: