[EMAIL PROTECTED] On 1/17/08, Pierre Habouzit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 08:07:22PM +0000, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 07:23:40PM +0000, Ilya M. Slepnev wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I've packaged lighttpd1.5 package (svn r2048), closing this bug: > > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=460433 > > > and uploaded it to mentors.debian.net: > > > http://mentors.debian.net/cgi-bin/sponsor-pkglist?action=details;package=lighttpd1.5 > > > > > > Can you look, if it is good packaged? > > > > > > Is it possible to upload it to Debian in experimental or unstable section? > > > The reason, that I packaged it is that we need to use lighttpd1.5 in > > > production, but Debian lighttpd maintainers build package only for > > > 1.4version. > > > > Please just don't sponsor this upload. lighttpd is nowhere near > > production quality, and debian won't upload it. I don't know why I > > overlooked this bug report, it seems my procmail filter needs serious > > tweaking, but (1) there is absolutely no valid reasons to have 2 > > separate lighttpd packages and (2) the 1.5 version is not stable enough. > > Okay, I god confused with lighttpd 2.0, 1.5 is just the next in line > in the same generation as 1.4.18 (currently in debian), and 1.5 is _NOT_ > released yet. So packaging it is nonsense. > > I'm closing the bug, we don't package unreleased software, we only > backport patches if needed.
Even in experimental? Why are your talking about nonsense of packaging? It has sense. Can you really imagine a process of backporting modules from 1.5 to 1.4? I can cite lighttd.net: "If you are developing a plugin for 1.4.x right now, be asured that it won't work without changes in 1.5.0." ( from here:http://blog.lighttpd.net/articles/2006/07/26/1-4-12-becomes-1-5-0 ) The question about quality of package is still actual. -- Thanks, Ilya M. Slepnev -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
