[Freedombox-discuss] tahoe-lafs now in debian

[bertagaz at ptitcanardnoir.org]

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 02:06:24PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On 11-06-21 at 01:18pm, bertagaz at ptitcanardnoir.org wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:19:15PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > > On 11-06-19 at 04:27pm, bertagaz at ptitcanardnoir.org wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 09:09:12AM -0500, Adam Novak wrote:
> > > > > We don't need it in years. We need it now. We needed it in 
> > > > > February. If there needs to be a repository in addition to the 
> > > > > main Debian one in order to ship now rather than later, we can 
> > > > > set that up now and get all the packages into the mainline 
> > > > > later.
> > > > 
> > > > +1
> > > > 
> > > > That'd be nice anyway if FB users had a way to add repositories 
> > > > using the web interface.
> > > > 
> > > > I intend to push an official backport soon anyway.
> > > 
> > > What do you mean by "official"?
> > 
> > I mean hosted in Debian backport archive.
> 
> Please beware that being part of Debian "official" backport archive does 
> not make it stable.

Thanks, I was already aware of that.

> Debian provides all stable parts as a single repository.
> 
> We should *not* encourage FreedomBox users to use non-stable parts.

But we should probably *not* disable the possibility for FreedomBox users
to use repo like the backports one. It's sometimes the only way to get a
new feature into a stable Debian while still having the benefits of Debian
archive keyring. To the cons of stablility/security trade-off, but maybe
this kind of choice is up to users, as long as they are advertised of the
implications. It's still better than having Freedombox users to use rogue
repositories for a new package/feature.

bert.