Re: Split of volatile webpages complete: please test/comment
Hi Luk,
On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 06:48:40PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> Mike Dornberger wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 22, 2007 at 04:31:39PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> >> The split of the volatile webpages is comitted into the www.d.o
> >> repository.
> >>
> >> Please test if everything is working correctly and don't be afraid to
> >> send comments to the appropriate list or in private.
> > would be easier, if you included the link to page you meant. I forgot
> > the actual address and had to use google. :)
> The page has been split in http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-volatile/
> for developers (a.k.a. uploaders) and http://www.debian.org/volatile/ for
> users. So the page you were looking for is probably the latter...
oh, indeed, nice. It must have slipped from my memory (if it was mentioned
earlier on this list). :)
> If someone knows a good way to mention the users' page on the devels' page
> and vice versa, please share it :-)
Why not saying something like "Instructions for using the volatile archive
can be found at the <a href...>debian-volatile for end users page</a>."
right after "...even without getting the drawbacks for the selected
packages" on http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-volatile/index.en.html .
On http://www.debian.org/volatile/index.en.html maybe after the Contacts
section "Upload instructions for developers can be found at the <a
href...>debian-volatile for developers page</a>."
> > Both sites say, it should be easy for admins to "just use" volatile and
> > sloppy is mentioned, but there is no config snipped how that could be
> > done. (E. g. sources.list entry, is something necessary for the apt
> > preferences file?) I think this should be there or a big fat link for
> > those admins where appropriate information can be found. The www.d.o
> > page lacks also a link to mirrors and the signing keys.
>
> All are mentioned on the page meant for users:
> http://www.debian.org/volatile/
Indeed it does (except for sloppy). (You linked to the signing key, too.)
Good work. :)
> > Maybe it would also be a good idea to mention, that the volatile
> > packages/versions cannot be found via packages.debian.org.
>
> Well, backports packages, security packages, proposed-updates packages etc
> are also not found via packages.debian.org.
Security is mentioned, but it's easily overlooked. Cf. the webcalendar
package:
http://packages.debian.org/cgi-bin/search_packages.pl?keywords=webcalendar&searchon=names&subword=1&version=all&release=all
mentions two versions for oldstable and on
http://packages.debian.org/oldstable/web/webcalendar there is a red
[security] tag.
That backports is not mentioned doesn't amaze me, because it's not an
official Debian project, AFAIK.
>From some discussions I read I got the impression, that packages in p-u
could be outdated and/or can have open security bugs. But at least packages
there aren't approved by the release managers to go into the next point
release (yet). One reason could be, that they break the upgrade path and so
they may not be suitable for end users anyway. So not mention them for the
unwary user vs. completeness... I think I would have gone for the former,
too. :) (Or was it a decision of lucidity?)
Hm, maybe mentioning volatile on p.d.o could be a TODO item?
> > I think it is still a good idea to say something about "Your package got
> > rejected. -- So what next?" Is the MessageID finder mentioned in some
> > policy or reference manual that can be pointed to? (The actual address
> > for it is: http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/?m=<msg-id> )
>
> Like 'Please read the above again', sorry but I don't see what it brings
> to repeat everything in the negative sense...
Yes, you are right. It doesn't make much sense. Of course should a DD know,
where he/she can get help. :)
Maybe I was somehow driven by the detailed descriptions of the installation
manual or release notes. Reading it I sometimes thought something like 'How
could someone use/install {Linux,Debian} without knowing _that_?' But please
don't ask me about such paragraphs, my memory is failing me again. :) Ah,
hm, and by the fact that the msg-id search is the second best thing since
bread came sliced and should be mentioned more often. ;)
Greetings,
Mike, trying hard to remember the last time writing a short email
Reply to: