[Pkg-samba-maint] Backports status

[Christian Perrier]

Hi folks,

This week-end, among other things, I did some work on backports.

First of all, an Etch backport of lenny packages has been uploaded on
www.backports.org in etch-backports: this is 2:3.2.5-4~bpo41+1 and the
relevant branch is
svn+ssh://svn.debian.org/svn/pkg-samba/branches/samba/backports/etch
These packages are waiting for NEW processing by backports.org folks.


I also re-organised the crap^W stuff we had in
http://pkg-samba.alioth.debian.org/packages
(/org/alioth.debian.org/chroot/home/groups/pkg-samba/htdocs/packages):

- lenny-backports is aimed to have the last 3.2 version, for lenny. It
  currently has i386 and amd64 binaries
  In SVN, this is
  svn+ssh://svn.debian.org/svn/pkg-samba/branches/samba/backports/lenny
  Current packages version: 2:3.2.7-1~bpo50+1

- etch-backports has the same for etch. It currently has i386
  binaries.
  Source not in SVN right now.
  Current packages version: 2:3.2.7-1~bpo41+1

Both these are apt-get'able with:
deb http://pkg-samba.alioth.debian.org {etch|lenny}-backports main
deb-src http://pkg-samba.alioth.debian.org {etch|lenny}-backports main

The repository has been setup manually by /me with empiric use of
dpkg-scanpakages and dpkg-scansources...:-). I tried to make the
packages signed, but failed miserably to create the right Release and
Release.gpg files. Help welcomed (the directory is team-writable).



Plans for the long term:

- continue supporting etch-backports on backports.org. Of course,
  given bpo policy, we'll have there the same upstream version than
  what we have in testing, so quite soon 3.3.0 releases
  
- have lenny-backports with the same policy

- Try supplying last 3.2 versions in our private repositories, both
  for etch and lenny

- Maybe also do the same for 3.3. That would need a naming scheme

I will quite probably again reorganise the branches/backports branch:

backports.org/
 etch/
 lenny/
3.2-latest/
 etch/
 lenny/
3.3-latest/
 etch/
 lenny/

Ideally, we should try having both i386 and amd64 packages but I don't
have easy access to an amd64 machine and I suck at using developer
machines..:)

I think that all this is covering most of the needs of our users.

Of course, all this will be done on a best effort basis, but
rebuilding such packages isn't that complicated, indeed.




-- 


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-samba-maint/attachments/20090126/46488f2e/attachment.pgp