Bug#692984: Expected upload of sogo-connector

[Carsten Schoenert <c.schoenert@t-online.de>]

Hello Luca,

Am 22.07.2014 13:59, schrieb Luca Capello:
> Any reason why this is not on Alioth?

there is no special reason, I just started last year the packaging and
wanted the repo putting in some "official" place to let other see the
current state. But I wanted be able to rebase and push my work without
any take care for on person depended on a repository in a more public
place like Alioth.

Once the package is accepted it will move to Alioth.

> Actually, using a *plain* wheezy chroot is not enough:
...
> Here is the reason:
> =====
> $ rmadison icedove-dev | grep wheezy
>  icedove-dev | 10.0.12-1          | wheezy            | amd64, armel, armhf, i386, ia64, kfreebsd-amd64, kfreebsd-i386, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, s390x, sparc
>  icedove-dev | 17.0.10-1~deb7u1   | wheezy-security   | ia64, kfreebsd-amd64, kfreebsd-i386, mips, mipsel
>  icedove-dev | 24.5.0-1~deb7u1    | wheezy-security   | s390, sparc
>  icedove-dev | 24.6.0-1~deb7u1    | wheezy-security   | amd64, armel, armhf, i386, powerpc, s390x
> $ 
> =====
> 
> I confirm that adding the wheezy-security repository is enought to build
> a wheezy-backports without changing anything in the current Debian
> sources on GitHub.

I know this circumstance, but thanks for hinting.

> Since we currently use this extension, I am interested in a
> wheezy-backports and I could maintain it by myself, but only once it
> reaches testing and anyway not before the next 3 months.

A backport is heavily depending on entering the testing release, so I
still don't care much about it in the current state. But as you wrote
it's more a question of the chroot to build a backport package. Right
know I would be happy to get the connector into testing before the freeze.

-- 
Regards
Carsten