| From: | Martin Pitt <mpitt(at)debian(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alexander Wirt <formorer(at)formorer(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch>, Postgres General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pkg-postgresql-public(at)lists(dot)alioth(dot)debian(dot)org, backports-users(at)lists(dot)backports(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [Pkg-postgresql-public] Postgres major version support policy on Debian |
| Date: | 2008-10-10 07:49:01 |
| Message-ID: | 20081010074901.GB6886@piware.de |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Alexander Wirt [2008-10-10 7:02 +0200]:
> > > So a compromise I can live with is to put it back into unstable (or
> > > even just experimental), but never let it propagate to testing. Then
> > > backports.org can do mechanized backports of updates without being
> mechanized? No.
I meant it in the sense of "run a script to create a backport from a
particular testing/unstable release, as opposed to changing any source
package and upload it manually to backports.org". I would very much
assume that this is what currently happens with backports.org. At
least that's how we do backports in Ubuntu, with "backport-source.py
package_name source_release".
I didn't mean "automatically move every -8.2 unstable upload to
-backports", of course.
> Only if they are tested carefully.
Goes without saying.
> And I still don't like this.
--verbose ?
Thanks,
Martin
--
Martin Pitt | http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com) | Debian Developer (www.debian.org)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jagadeesh | 2008-10-10 07:57:25 | Re: logging SQL statements |
| Previous Message | Martin Pitt | 2008-10-10 07:46:13 | Re: [Pkg-postgresql-public] Postgres major version support policy on Debian |